Licensing Working Group/Minutes/2024-01-08

From OpenStreetMap Foundation

OpenStreetMap Foundation, Licensing Working Group (LWG) - Agenda & Minutes
8 January 2024, 18:00 UTC

Participants

  • Kathleen Lu (Chairing)
  • Dermot McNally
  • Simon Hughes
  • Tom Hummel
  • Tom Lee
  • Guillaume Rischard (OSMF board)

Absent

  • Jim Vidano

Administrative

Adoption of past minutes

Previous action items

  • 2018-03-08 All to look at the Working Groups collecting personal information.
  • 2018-04-12 LWG to follow-up on the iD editor, as the number of changesets is now included on the changeset comments thread.
  • 2020-10-08 Simon Poole and Guillaume Rischard to look at the translation issue of the copyright policy page
  • 2020-10-08 Jim Vidano to work on updating the privacy policy in relation to OSMF's use of a commercial CDN, and Kathleen Lu will have a look at it.
  • 2021-02-11 Kathleen Lu to check LWG-specific membership requirements on the OSMF website and Conflict of Interest policy and provide to Dorothea any updates for the website.
  • 2021-03-11 Guillaume Rischard to sort out various email issues - Making sure Dermot McNally is on the main legal mailing issue, making sure everyone is getting OTRS email notifications for the legal queue.
  • 2021-07-08 Guillaume Rischard to meet with Dermot McNally about using OTRS.
  • 2021-07-08 LWG members to provide comment on the HOT draft trademark agreement on the next meeting.
  • 2021-07-08 Jim Vidano to look at next steps for Opensnowmap.org paperwork after the trademark request has been approved by the board.
  • 2021-07-08 Dermot McNally to ask Tobias for expected outcome regarding the request for change of the text of the standard tile license.
  • 2021-08-12 Tom Hummel to suggest text to be published regarding OSMF's legitimate interest in processing personal data.
  • 2021-08-12 Dermot McNally to reply to Tobias about simplifying the text of the tile licence.
  • 2021-08-12 Dermot McNally to make the pull request on GitHub openstreemap-website regarding attribution requirements for OSMF tiles
  • 2021-08-12 Dermot McNally to communicate back to contacts regarding Australian data attribution and suggest filling the waiver template.
  • 2021-08-12 LWG to identify OSMF legal texts that might be needed under German law to be in German.
  • 2021-09-09 Jim Vidano to ask Simon Poole whether he has previous emails contacting companies that were not displaying attribution.
  • 2021-09-09 Guillaume Rischard to check past emails (e.g. last year ones related to case in Germany where they settled in court) for any sent to companies not complying with attribution requirements and to send what he finds, including links to the GitHub repositories with the lists of not complying organisations, to the Signal group.
  • 2021-09-09 Jim Vidano and Dermot McNally (2021-12-09) to create a draft template email for the community to contact organisations regarding non compliance with the attribution guidelines
  • 2021-09-09 Dermot McNally to reply to Jean-Marc Liotier (board of directors) with the LWG decision to create a template email for minor cases of non-compliance with the attribution guidelines available to the community and the LWG to directly contact bigger companies.
  • 2022-01-13 Simon Hughes to download a copy of the Copyright FAQ page and mark anything that is not matching the attribution guidelines or is confusing and circulate that to the LWG.
  • 2022-04-14 Guillaume Rischard to ask Tom Hughes to see how many translations of the Copyright and Copyright FAQ page are live. Topic Needed: Update to Copyright FAQ page to match new attribution guidelines
  • 2022-09-15 Dermot McNally to send an email to the companies mentioned on Ticket#2022011910000082 and Ticket#202201261000014
  • 2022-09-15 Guillaume Rischard to respond to the email Ticket#202208041000024 and redirect to the right person.
  • 2022-10-13 Guillaume Rischard to take the Ticket#2022100310000013 issue to the board (related to legal consequences for “unlicensed surveying”)
  • 2022-11-10 Guillaume Rischard to pass the message to the board member who wrote to the LWG about Open Database License (ODbL).
  • 2023-03-06 Kathleen Lu to write back to Iiro Laiho (Inquiry re Finnish satellite imagery) and have them clarify that the attribution is ok. The LWG to update the attribution.
  • 2023-04-03 Guillaume Rischard to ask Grant Slater regarding passing LWG tickets to OWG.
  • 2023-04-03 Dermot McNally to find wording that makes it clear to the recipients of the love letters that the letters come from mappers.
  • 2023-04-03 Guillaume Rischard to send the Attribution Guidelines (Case of German Federal Mapping Agency buried attribution)
  • 2023-04-03 Tom Lee to reply to the OSM Serbia community on GitHub asking for additional details (Ticket#2023030810000178 - Serbian Geodata)
  • 2023-04-03 Dermot McNally to put Benito Romualdo Palma Temoaya in touch with the Mexican community (Ticket#2023032410000272 – Asesoría)
  • 2023-05-15 Dermot McNally to write a template reply for emails we receive regarding missing attribution and send it to Kathleen.
  • 2023-05-15 Kathleen Lu to create an OTRS template with Dermot’s template reply regarding missing attribution.
  • 2023-05-15 Simon Hughes' trademark person to draft a physical merchandise template. Existing templates on domain names and State of the Map conference can be used.
  • 2023-05-15 Kathleen Lu to write to the person that contacted the LWG regarding OSM merchandise that the Board is considering the issue.
  • 2023-06-12 Guillaume Rischard  to ask Grant about how to block addresses in OTRS.
  • 2023-06-12 LWG to suggest to Mapilio to modify the wording regarding permission to OSM, to make it clearer.
  • 2023-07-10 Guillaume Rischard  to ask Grant regarding reducing the amount of spam on the privacy OTRS queue.
  • 2023-07-10 Tom Lee offered to delete spam messages on the privacy OTRS queue.
  • 2023-07-10 Dermot McNally to ask Guillaume about the contact details of the Latin American group, in order to contact them about Ticket#2023032410000272 – Asesoría
  • 2023-08-14 Kathleen Lu to write back that LWG voted this is okay. [Topic: Ticket#2023081110000064 — First party websites as sources]
  • 2023-08-14 Kathleen Lu to contact Stamen and Stadia Maps [Topic: Email with complaint that OSM is used to display on a map supposed incidents where foreigners might have become perpetrators of crimes]
  • 2023-09-11 Kathleen Lu to add the "template response to missing attribution reports" to the OTRS queue.
  • 2023-09-11 Kathleen Lu to email OWG and ask them to add the following two templates to the OTRS group queues (LWG, DWG, MWG, etc): 1) template response to missing attribution reports 2) user deletion request template.
  • 2023-09-11 Kathleen Lu to request tweak: By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and the [OpenStreetMap] Foundation’s [Contributor Terms]. [MapBuilder].
  • 2023-09-11 Simon Hughes to ask Geolytica whether they have removed all the OSM data, and not just for TomTom.
  • 2023-10-16 Tom Lee to create a draft statement by the next LWG meeting that could be used by the board to encourage governments to publish under CC0, ODbL, OGL or with a waiver to OSM. [Topic: Re-discuss the compatibility issue of ODbL and CC-BY?]
  • 2023-10-16 Kathleen Lu to comment on the pull request, that the LWG voted and approved the addition [Topic: Request from Czech local chapter]
  • 2023-11-13 Tom Lee to create a draft statement by the next LWG meeting that could be used by the board to encourage governments to publish under CC0, ODbL, OGL or with a waiver to OSM. [Topic: Ordnance Survey Ireland waiver - Update by Dermot McNally]
  • 2023-11-13 Tom Hummel to read https://open.nrw/system/files/media/document/file/opennrw_rechtl_gutachten_datenlizenzen_lowres_web.pdf https://open.nrw/verwendung-von-open-data-lizenzen [Topic: Ticket#2023110610000184 - Importing Austrian governmental data]m to add to add the following two templat
  • 2023-11-13 Tom Hummel to contact a lawyer from the German local chapter, and get his opinion on the general stance of mid-level governmental agencies. Estimated to have a response by early December. [Topic: Ticket#2023110610000184 - Importing Austrian governmental data]

Reportage and action item updates

Any updates on reported attribution cases?

Reports in OTRS:


Trademarks – any updates?

UMBRAOSM

Suggestions

  • Oppose the trademark application, as the deadline for opposition is on 22 January 2024, and suggest to them to become a Local Chapter.
  • If they register as a local chapter, OSMF can sign an agreement allowing them to register the trademark. The local chapter agreement includes a clause about return of trademark assets, if there is an issue.

Points mentioned during discussion

Guillaume messaged UmbraOSM on Telegram during the meeting.

Action item: Kathleen Lu to contact Lawdit and enquire about the cost estimate for opposing the trademark registration by UMBRAOSM.


Geolytica

Geolytica said that they would contact OSMF directly.

Response from Geolytica: They claim to have resolved all issues (but did not explain how).
Can someone investigate and find some more examples?

Issues

  • They might have old data from OSM, which has been since updated in OSM, so it won’t be easily identifiable.
  • Some of their data might be the same in OSM and in other sources.
  • Their sample data might not be as current as the data their sell.

Geolytica sample data

  • Geolytica has updated their sample data, since we contacted them. Latest update of samples: 20 December 2023.
  • Some of the US data had appropriate labels for the sources (US government or chain names). This was not true in some of the other countries in the sample data.

Suggestions

  • Check the history of data points in OSM when doing the comparisons.
    • Do not disclose to Geolytica the indicators to identify some of the OSM data.
  • Simon Hughes to have a call with head of Engineering at TomTom.

Next steps

  • Guillaume Rischard to re-download all their sample data and check how many of the entries changed to identify level of efforts. Look at other entries.
  • Simon Hughes to ask the TomTom engineering team to compare the Geolytica dataset provided to TomTom with the Geolytica sample data, which allegedly is now free of OSM data.

Microsoft MapBuilder

Microsoft

  • Kirill Fedotov (Microsoft) provided the new designs for the Microsoft MapBuilder sign-up screens.
  • They seem to be looking for the final approval of the designs, before release.

This issue is currently not looked by the board.

On OSM account sign-ups through MapBuilder

  • Valid point that the sign up process is difficult, especially when using external apps.
  • The persons’ emails are proxied individually, so any communication from us should reach them. Failure of proxy infrastructure would lead to dead end.

On hypothetical case of MapBuilder users who don’t want to be contacted by us

  • Contacting them is covered by our terms of use, which they have agreed to.
  • Cases where they are unreachable: this is not different from other emails provider going down. If Microsoft would go down, we would get ample notice.
  • Cases where people lose interest: this is normal and the contributor terms are built to account for that scenario. For example, in case of a licence change, not everyone is required to vote.

Concern: Proxying initiative goes down

  • Probably we would get some warning.
  • Low probability. They don’t do proxying emails just for OSM.

Action item: Kathleen Lu to reply to Kirill Fedotov that the new MapBuilder designs for OSM account sign-ups look good.


Meeting with Brigitte Lutz/Austrian gov and OSMF Austria Local Chapter - Ticket#2023110610000184 related 

Brief summary:
The Austrian Local Chapter was trying to get a waiver signed by an Austrian governmental agency in order to be able to import governmental datasets into OSM and the governmental agency was saying that the waiver was not necessary. Discussion between the two sides to find a satisfactory conclusion.

  • The date was formalised – Neither Dermot McNally nor Tom Hummel could attend.
  • The person wanted to reschedule but Tom did not receive any follow up.Important to be in contact with governmental agencies, as they release data to the public.

Action item: Tom Hummel to reply to the last email about rescheduling the meeting regarding the Austrian governmental datasets , cc Dermot and try to schedule a new date.


Related: Tom Hummel to contact a lawyer from the German local chapter, and get his opinion on the general stance of mid-level governmental agencies. Estimated to have a response by early December.

The topic will be re-visited in February.


Queries to legal-questions

Organic Maps app feature - Ticket#2023112510000086

The Organic Maps app uses OSM data. Clicking on a hotel shows photos, reviews and booking through Kayak, through an affiliate link to open Kayak, so Organics Maps would earn something. The question is whether they created a non-compliant dataset with data from both Kayak and OSM.

Points mentioned during discussion

  • Unclear how augmentation of OSM data is made and if they add hotels from Kayak that we don't have, or if they correct the hotels’ positions.
  • This is like horizontal layers.
  • The email statement that one type of POIs must either be from OSM or external source is not true.
    • It is most likely that they are adding Kayak links to the hotels they have from OSM, rather than conflating hotels.

Action item: Kathleen Lu to reply to the reporter that, per horizontal layers, what was done with the Organic Maps feature related to https://github.com/organicmaps/organicmaps/pull/6523/commits/51b3fc992e66e49b4c9a77e3d3fb05d99027baf5 is fine for data about hotel booking, and enquire about further concerns.


App "OSM - Open Source Maps & GPS" - Email to legal@osmfoundation

  • OpenMultiMaps was renamed on Google Play as "OSM - Open Source Maps & GPS".
  • It seems to be a wrapping of somebody else's app.
  • Uses OSM trademarks.

Action item: Kathleen to perform a Google report and ask them to take the "OSM - Open Source Maps & GPS" app down.


Matomo tracking on www.osm.org Ticket#2023122410000102

Points mentioned during discussion

  • The information supplied in the email can be determined by config files send to the browsers.
  • A lot of the things listed in the email would not be mentioned in the privacy policy, as they are not personal data.
  • OWG can ascertain about the information collected.
  • Users don’t get a cookie banner, as we use only necessary cookies.
  • Plugins can be used to fingerprint users by their browser.

On whether users can opt out of Matomo tracking.

  • No, it’s necessary.

> Question 5 and 6

  • We keep IP addresses for a short time, for abuse protection.
  • The OWG can answer.

Action item: Kathleen Lu to contact OWG regarding Matomo tracking (Q5: is there a delay after which old IP addresses are anonymised and Q6: For how long is Matomo tracking information retained by OSMF). LWG to answer questions one to four, providing the reasoning.


Use of OSM trademark on OSM.tips websites

  • We try to discourage use of OSM marks in domains, as – if the project of the domain dies - they can fall to non-OSM parties.
  • The content of these domains will be about OSM, so it is possible to have a trademark agreement with them, where the domains will be handed to us in such cases.

Action item: Kathleen Lu to forward this request for permission to use the OSM trademarks on the domains: osm.tips, osmtips.de, osmtips.eu, osmtips.org, osmtips.com to the board.


https://opengeohub.org/about-openlandmap/

Issues

  • They claim to have a trademark on the OpenLandMap name: “OpenGeoHub and OpenLandMap are registered trademarks of the OpenGeoHub Foundation"
  • They use OSM and are not attributing.
  • They are using our tiles.

On claim of trademarked name

  • Maybe the phrasing is wrong and they only have trademarked OpenGeoHub.
  • The sentence about the tradermarked name seems to have been added around 2019/2021.

On attribution to OSM

  • Attribution is displayed: in the infobox, on hover and in the text of the home page.
  • The crediting instructions direct users to "credit each layer based on the instructions available in the metadata or on the landing page. If no other option is available you can credit these data by using “© OpenLandMap.org contributors” and/or by using https://openlandmap.org
    • They don’t know which layers people will use.
  • As they are using our tiles and resources, they need to add “OpenStreetMap” on the base map, or use their own tile server.

Other points mentioned during discussion

  • Most of the links are broken.
  • Data does not seem to get mixed.
  • OSM.org is using ODbL data which we have imported and not attributing the sources.
  • They obviously like OSM.

Suggestions

  • love letter process: send them a friendly email asking them to add attribution.
  • ask them to change the name of the project.

On different types of attribution

  • Attribution due to use of OSMF tiles
  • Attribution due to use of OSM data.
    • We probably can’t complain to them about data attribution without being hypocritical.
    • Both types are the same attribution.
      • They have different principle.

Action item: Guillaume Rischard to send an attribution love letter to OpenGeoHub, regarding OpenLandMap.


Any other business

Mapbox-using companies and OSM attribution

Report by Tom Lee on the three companies who are using Mapbox and had not fixed OSM attribution:

  • GIS site: fixed it.
  • Ukrainian site: they have two weeks to fix it.
  • New York City scooter site: have not responded yet. Since they are a paying customer, they will likely need to renew their account and we’ll be probably able to contact someone there.

German federal cartography agency

Issue
The German federal cartography agency https://www.bkg.bund.de/DE/Home/home.html repackages OSM data, while burying OSM attribution in a PDF file on their site. This data sets gets used by others, including Google Maps.

Action items

  • Guillaume Rischard to talk with Tom Hummel, before the latter talks to the German lawyer.
  • Guillaume Rischard to provide a summary regarding the German federal cartography agency issue at the next meeting.

GDPR ticket for the www.osm.org website

  • The GDPR-related ticket for the www.osm.orgwebsite has been getting traction.
  • There is a proposal by EWG, which has not been forwarded to LWG for review.
  • GDPR has probably gotten more strict over time.
  • The GDPR 24-page whitepaper https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/images/8/88/GDPR_Position_Paper.pdf was by Roland, not by LWG – Kathleen had commented.
  • Kathleen had a conversation with the German author of the GDPR whitepaper and with Simon Poole (past LWG chairperson), about GDPR, during SotM Milanor Heidelberg. At that time, there wasn't any information on the potential technical difficulties.
  • The LWG is fine with prioritisation of items by the EWG.
  • The LWG can review the requirements and prioritise items, if needed.

New action items

  • Kathleen Lu to contact Lawdit and enquire about the cost estimate for opposing the trademark registration by UMBRAOSM. [Trademark notice: UMBRAOSM]
  • Kathleen Lu to reply to Kirill Fedotov that the new MapBuilder designs for OSM account sign-ups look good. [Microsoft MapBuilder]
  • Tom Hummel to reply to the last email about rescheduling the meeting regarding the Austrian governmental datasets , cc Dermot and try to schedule a new date. [Ticket#2023110610000184 related - Meeting with Brigitte Lutz/Austrian gov and OSMF Austria Local Chapter]
  • Kathleen Lu to reply to the reporter that, per horizontal layers, what was done with the Organic Maps feature related to https://github.com/organicmaps/organicmaps/pull/6523/commits/51b3fc992e66e49b4c9a77e3d3fb05d99027baf5 is fine for data about hotel booking, and enquire about further concerns. [Ticket#2023112510000086]
  • Kathleen to perform a Google report and ask them to take the "OSM - Open Source Maps & GPS" app down. [App "OSM - Open Source Maps & GPS" - Email to legal@osmfoundation]
  • Kathleen Lu to contact OWG regarding Matomo tracking (Q5: is there a delay after which old IP addresses are anonymised and Q6: For how long is Matomo tracking information retained by OSMF). LWG to answer questions one to four, providing the reasoning. [Matomo tracking on www.osm.org Ticket#2023122410000102]

Next Meetings

Monday 12 February 2024, 1800 UTC
Monday 04 March 2024, 1800 UTC
Monday 08 April 2024 (summer hours - 1700)
Monday 13 May 2024, 1700 UTC
Monday 10 June 2024, 1700 UTC
Monday 08 July 2024, 1700 UTC
Monday 12 August 2024, 1700 UTC
Monday 09 September 2024, 1700 UTC
Monday 07 October 2024, 1700 UTC
Monday 18 November 2024 (back to winter hours - 1800)
Monday 09 December 2024, 1800 UTC


Meeting adjourned 1 hour and 37 minutes after start.