You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@royale.apache.org by OmPrakash Muppirala <bi...@gmail.com> on 2018/03/05 04:19:14 UTC
Re: Page linked to from license page no longer exists
I have pushed out a proper fix for this issue here:
https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/commit/dc117d2ab947fbc3ee7c0d4e7ccefd861457968a
Thanks,
Om
On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 9:07 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.invalid>
wrote:
> Om, I made a comment on your commit. I do not think the one you chose is
> ALv2 compatible, plus we have to actually use the data points in the file.
>
> My 2 cents,
> -Alex
>
> On 2/17/18, 10:33 AM, "omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
> <omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of bigosmallm@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >I already pushed a fix for this.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Om
> >
> >On Feb 17, 2018 8:50 AM, "Gabe Harbs" <ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> This page has quite a few different variations:
> >>
> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommons
> .
> >>wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FCategory%3ASVG_maps_of_the_
> United_States&data=02%7
> >>C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C1f28478856e2456dd32508d57634
> e733%7Cfa7b1b5a7b3
> >>4438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636544891969705524&
> sdata=bYjY8KdAJK0F%2BV
> >>hc0HRW%2BDYHLS9xucVz8QQ%2BuuDohfA%3D&reserved=0
> >>
> >><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fcommons
> >>.wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FCategory%3ASVG_maps_of_the_
> United_States&data=02%
> >>7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C1f28478856e2456dd32508d57634
> e733%7Cfa7b1b5a7b
> >>34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636544891969705524&
> sdata=bYjY8KdAJK0F%2B
> >>Vhc0HRW%2BDYHLS9xucVz8QQ%2BuuDohfA%3D&reserved=0
> >> >
> >>
> >> > On Feb 17, 2018, at 6:46 PM, Gabe Harbs <ha...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > What about this one?
> >> >
> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommons
> .
> >>wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ABlank_US_Map_&data=02%7C01%
> 7Caharui%40adobe
> >>.com%7C1f28478856e2456dd32508d57634e733%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee
> >>1%7C0%7C0%7C636544891969705524&sdata=QMTwWPloTVKXDPcHZtvhRErADNf6vW
> KEnSIA
> >>kmH3R2E%3D&reserved=0(
> >> states_only).svg#file
> >><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fcommons
> >>.wikimedia&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7C1f28478856e2456dd32508d576
> >>34e733%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> 7C636544891969705524&sd
> >>ata=bbFZwFSP%2FfBp%2B0QJcGJsK%2Bsjn1bN5SIrXG%2FxOIXVG2I%3D&reserved=0.
> >> org/wiki/File:Blank_US_Map_(states_only).svg#file>
> >> >
> >> >> On Feb 16, 2018, at 6:49 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala
> >><bigosmallm@gmail.com
> >> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> I'll look into it.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> Om
> >> >>
> >> >> On Feb 16, 2018 8:35 AM, "Alex Harui" <aharui@adobe.com.invalid
> >> <ma...@adobe.com.invalid>> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Bummer. Looks like WikiPedia decided to remove it. I think Om
> >> >>> contributed that, so I guess we should let him decide whether to
> >>find
> >> >>> another source for the data or remove the example.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> My 2 cents,
> >> >>> -Alex
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On 2/16/18, 3:17 AM, "Andrew Wetmore" <cottage14@gmail.com <mailto:
> >> cottage14@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> Hi:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> on Welcome/licenses.md there is this passage:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> The map coordinates in examples/native/USStatesMap/
> src/MapCoords.as
> >> were
> >> >>>> placed into the Public Domain by its author. See:
> >> >>>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= <
> >> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=>
> >> >>> https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipe
> >> >>>> dia.org
> >><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2Fdia.org%
> >>2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C1f28478856e2456dd32508d57634
> e733%7
> >>Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636544891969705524&sdata=
> sLZJ
> >>dlVLrEckIbXnuVgCF1Gbb5M%2FnN1eaLxyeqmyRzU%3D&reserved=
> 0>%2Fwiki%2FFile%3A
> >>USA_CIA_Map.svg%
> >> 23file&data=02%
> >> >>> 7C01%7Caharui%40ado
> >> >>>> be.com
> >><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2Fbe.com%2
> >>F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C1f28478856e2456dd32508d57634
> e733%7C
> >>fa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636544891969705524&sdata=
> pOUJX
> >>mkMShi02y51kAj4CoNFU9n1I3mLHjF%2FBrgKTbM%3D&reserved=0>%
> 7C8c30db66c9c448a
> >>2a77708d5752ed58e%
> >> 7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> >> >>> ce
> >> >>>>
> >>e1%7C0%7C0%7C636543766369921734&sdata=EVjU7uzApzAiAIf8CoayF6n7kP6LQs
> >> >>> WtxHHZ
> >> >>>> zqTNb5M%3D&reserved=0
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> When I click that link I get a message that the file has been
> >>deleted.
> >> >>>> Since this is license-related, do we need to hunt out a replacement
> >> >>>> source?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> --
> >> >>>> Andrew Wetmore
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> >> http%3A%2F%2Fcottage14
> >><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fna01.sa
> >>felinks&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C1f28478856e2456dd32508d57634
> e
> >>733%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> 7C636544891969705524&sdata
> >>=hMKT12dmH0OSFSdC4RC1oArE8tviecdFteQZuO3Peqs%3D&reserved=0.
> >> protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcottage14>
> >> >>> .
> >> >>>> blogspot.com
> >><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2Fblogspot
> >>.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C1f28478856e2456dd32508d57634
> e
> >>733%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> 7C636544891969705524&sdata
> >>=b%2BGZRxM5cdwHW2rHgNh2ySH0Gve5T9oxMMRwfHJQmlI%3D&reserved=0>%
> 2F&data=02%
> >>7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.
> >> com
> >><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2F40adobe
> .
> >>com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C1f28478856e2456dd32508d57634
> e7
> >>33%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> 7C636544891969705524&sdata=
> >>wHx3U0DEbSwyGD%2FVSdASxjtFlR9RACl0v9dI3UdKwxU%3D&reserved=0>%
> >> >>> 7C8c30db66c9c448a2a77708
> >> >>>> d5752ed58e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> >> >>> 7C636543766369921734
> >> >>>> &sdata=dwjkXL%2BDCfUpUYMLL9B4Mhpw%2BIjT%
> >> 2FlNEeEkpDMgMX8M%3D&reserved=0
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >
> >>
> >>
>
>
Re: Page linked to from license page no longer exists
Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,
> I have done the necessary due diligence on this issue. I think this issue
> has been taken care of as per legal requirements.
> If you think there are issues, please discuss this with the Legal PMC.
Alex also pointed out there is an issue here - do you also disagree with him? Of course he may he may of changed his mind since he brought it up.
Thanks,
Justin
Re: Page linked to from license page no longer exists
Posted by Harbs <ha...@gmail.com>.
Thanks. I was going to do that, but my week didn’t go as planned…
> On Mar 9, 2018, at 10:07 AM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID> wrote:
>
> I just switched to the data in
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blank_US_map_borders.svg.
>
> I will start an RC tomorrow if there are no further issues.
>
> -Alex
>
> On 3/6/18, 9:29 AM, "Alex Harui" <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID> wrote:
>
>> So you want to ship with the controversial situation we have now?
>>
>> I'm not going to start a release unless we are going to get enough votes
>> and not get mired down in further debating of this situation. Also, if
>> there is a ruling that requires changes after I start the release then I
>> will have wasted time.
>>
>> IMO, safest plans are to pull the example, or switch to a different set of
>> data points that is already Public Domain.
>>
>> What do others think?
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 3/6/18, 8:42 AM, "Harbs" <ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I figured I’d wait a couple of weeks. Like I said: I don’t think it
>>> should hold up a release if we don’t get an answer immediately.
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Mar 6, 2018, at 6:11 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> It is March 6. How many days should we wait? Especially given that
>>>> the
>>>> current VP Legal as resigned and no replacement has been announced yet?
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>> -Alex
>>>>
>>>> On 3/6/18, 1:03 AM, "Harbs" <ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The path data appears to be from the CC-BY derivative and not the
>>>>> public
>>>>> domain original.
>>>>>
>>>>> I do think we need to either get clarification of replace the path
>>>>> data
>>>>> (and possibly SVG file). I’m happy doing it myself.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have opened a JIRA for an official ruling on the topic. It feels
>>>>> like
>>>>> it’s easier to just replace the data than get the ruling, but I think
>>>>> this is something which *should* have a ruling. If it’s OK to reuse
>>>>> SVG
>>>>> data in Cat B images, folks shouldn’t have to jump through hoops just
>>>>> because there’s nothing clear on the topic.
>>>>>
>>>>> I do think it’s a relatively minor issue and should be classified as a
>>>>> bug. It’s not something that should hold up a release if it can’t be
>>>>> resolved before the next release. I just created an issue on the
>>>>> topic.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Harbs
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mar 6, 2018, at 7:56 AM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Om,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Comments inline.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/5/18, 3:09 PM, "omuppi1@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> on
>>>>>> behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
>>>>>> <omuppi1@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> on behalf of
>>>>>> bigosmallm@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 2:47 PM, Alex Harui
>>>>>>> <ah...@adobe.com.invalid>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Om,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am not able to follow your logic. I think I've read your full
>>>>>>>> email
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> have looked at the links. It appears you are trying to say that
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> data
>>>>>>>> points we are using came from [1], but to me, [1] seems clearly
>>>>>>>> under
>>>>>>>> GNU
>>>>>>>> Document and CC-BY-SA. The act of removing the state names from
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> data
>>>>>>>> in [2] made it a derivative work, and it appears that the author of
>>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>>> says that work is not under Public Domain.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The SVG asset itself is licensed as such. We are not using the svg
>>>>>>> asset
>>>>>>> anywhere. We are only using the map data which came from some other
>>>>>>> source.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Map data is not copyrightable.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please read the section under "The map wasn’t eligible for copyright
>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> first place" here:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.p
>>>>>>> u
>>>>>>> bl
>>>>>>> ic
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.
>>>>>>> p
>>>>>>> ub
>>>>>>> lic>
>>>>>>> domainsherpa.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdoma
>>>>>>> i
>>>>>>> ns
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> herpa.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Caa8f41c3bb32452833fb
>>>>>>> 0
>>>>>>> 8d
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 583411c9b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C63655923802978
>>>>>>> 5
>>>>>>> 55
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 6&sdata=Zu9S5xPRzulIqUlZ%2FgPEGVs0yjZNiNcPuMvB%2FfirN8E%3D&reserved=0
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> %2
>>>>>>> Fpublic-domain-maps.html&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.c
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> om%7Cdb3e0b405fdc43cf995108d582ee4e3b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178dec
>>>>>>> e
>>>>>>> e1
>>>>>>> %7
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> C0%7C0%7C636558882380334796&sdata=lhmEgOxJKLHmRSz5JAwCLCuAI0Iqy3cn7QQ
>>>>>>> u
>>>>>>> %2
>>>>>>> FI
>>>>>>> aaOfQ%3D&reserved=0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> " If the components of the map are “entirely obvious” the map will
>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>> copyrightable. For example, an outline map of the state of Texas, or
>>>>>>> one
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> the US showing the state boundaries is *not* copyrightable. (Not
>>>>>>> creative.)
>>>>>>> Ditto maps that use standard cartographic conventions, like a survey
>>>>>>> map.
>>>>>>> (Not original.) "
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Right after the passage you quote, it says this:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "This is could be a tough call in certain cases
>>>>>> (I mean, come on ... “entirely obvious”?) but
>>>>>> that's the what the courts have said. Just keep
>>>>>> in mind ... what you think is entirely obvious,
>>>>>> the mapmaker might contest as creative."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let's see what other PMC members think. To me, the quote I pasted
>>>>>> indicates that this is still a controversial area. The definition of
>>>>>> "map
>>>>>> data", AIUI, has to be tied to facts. So, GIS coordinates, or any
>>>>>> other
>>>>>> lat/lng fact that is used to create a map is not copyrightable, and
>>>>>> any
>>>>>> map image produced by the US Government is in the public domain. But
>>>>>> I
>>>>>> believe there is a gray area around the digitizing of maps. The
>>>>>> number
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> points chosen which create the level of detail of a map could be
>>>>>> argued
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> be a form of expression as well as the line-weights chosen for the
>>>>>> lines.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, the provenance/history of how the SVG file you chose became
>>>>>> public
>>>>>> domain is murky. I was unable to determine where the data points
>>>>>> came
>>>>>> from.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To me, that's one reason why folks on wikimedia are claiming
>>>>>> copyright
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> different licensing on their maps that are essentially digitized from
>>>>>> public domain US Government maps. The fact that the data points for
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> states are different in different SVG files also leads me to believe
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> data points are not facts. I think the safest and least
>>>>>> controversial
>>>>>> option is for us to use a map that is in the public domain already.
>>>>>> This
>>>>>> map [1] seems to have a much simpler public domain provenance. Then
>>>>>> I
>>>>>> think there is less surface for nitpickers to attack.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If other PMC members want to go with the current data you have in the
>>>>>> files then I'll defer to them (and you).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> -Alex
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommo
>>>>>> n
>>>>>> s.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ABlank_US_map_borders.svg&data=02%7C01%7C
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> ha
>>>>>>
>>>>>> rui%40adobe.com%7Caa8f41c3bb32452833fb08d583411c9b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b3443879
>>>>>> 4
>>>>>> ae
>>>>>>
>>>>>> d2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636559238029785556&sdata=uquU6h9UaHwKQRsd4V6%2B
>>>>>> H
>>>>>> Pu
>>>>>> MK6cvP8U5Vw7O5WRxCHI%3D&reserved=0
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcomm
>>>>>> o
>>>>>> ns
>>>>>>
>>>>>> .wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ABlank_US_map_borders.svg&data=02%7C01%7
>>>>>> C
>>>>>> ah
>>>>>>
>>>>>> arui%40adobe.com%7Caa8f41c3bb32452833fb08d583411c9b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b344387
>>>>>> 9
>>>>>> 4a
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636559238029785556&sdata=uquU6h9UaHwKQRsd4V6%2
>>>>>> B
>>>>>> HP
>>>>>> uMK6cvP8U5Vw7O5WRxCHI%3D&reserved=0>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: Page linked to from license page no longer exists
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>.
I just switched to the data in
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blank_US_map_borders.svg.
I will start an RC tomorrow if there are no further issues.
-Alex
On 3/6/18, 9:29 AM, "Alex Harui" <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID> wrote:
>So you want to ship with the controversial situation we have now?
>
>I'm not going to start a release unless we are going to get enough votes
>and not get mired down in further debating of this situation. Also, if
>there is a ruling that requires changes after I start the release then I
>will have wasted time.
>
>IMO, safest plans are to pull the example, or switch to a different set of
>data points that is already Public Domain.
>
>What do others think?
>-Alex
>
>On 3/6/18, 8:42 AM, "Harbs" <ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>I figured I’d wait a couple of weeks. Like I said: I don’t think it
>>should hold up a release if we don’t get an answer immediately.
>>
>>
>>> On Mar 6, 2018, at 6:11 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>> It is March 6. How many days should we wait? Especially given that
>>>the
>>> current VP Legal as resigned and no replacement has been announced yet?
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>> -Alex
>>>
>>> On 3/6/18, 1:03 AM, "Harbs" <ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The path data appears to be from the CC-BY derivative and not the
>>>>public
>>>> domain original.
>>>>
>>>> I do think we need to either get clarification of replace the path
>>>>data
>>>> (and possibly SVG file). I’m happy doing it myself.
>>>>
>>>> I have opened a JIRA for an official ruling on the topic. It feels
>>>>like
>>>> it’s easier to just replace the data than get the ruling, but I think
>>>> this is something which *should* have a ruling. If it’s OK to reuse
>>>>SVG
>>>> data in Cat B images, folks shouldn’t have to jump through hoops just
>>>> because there’s nothing clear on the topic.
>>>>
>>>> I do think it’s a relatively minor issue and should be classified as a
>>>> bug. It’s not something that should hold up a release if it can’t be
>>>> resolved before the next release. I just created an issue on the
>>>>topic.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Harbs
>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 6, 2018, at 7:56 AM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Om,
>>>>>
>>>>> Comments inline.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/5/18, 3:09 PM, "omuppi1@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> on
>>>>> behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
>>>>> <omuppi1@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> on behalf of
>>>>> bigosmallm@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 2:47 PM, Alex Harui
>>>>>><ah...@adobe.com.invalid>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Om,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am not able to follow your logic. I think I've read your full
>>>>>>>email
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> have looked at the links. It appears you are trying to say that
>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>> data
>>>>>>> points we are using came from [1], but to me, [1] seems clearly
>>>>>>>under
>>>>>>> GNU
>>>>>>> Document and CC-BY-SA. The act of removing the state names from
>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>> data
>>>>>>> in [2] made it a derivative work, and it appears that the author of
>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>> says that work is not under Public Domain.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The SVG asset itself is licensed as such. We are not using the svg
>>>>>> asset
>>>>>> anywhere. We are only using the map data which came from some other
>>>>>> source.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Map data is not copyrightable.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please read the section under "The map wasn’t eligible for copyright
>>>>>>in
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> first place" here:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.p
>>>>>>u
>>>>>>bl
>>>>>> ic
>>>>>>
>>>>>><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.
>>>>>>p
>>>>>>ub
>>>>>> lic>
>>>>>> domainsherpa.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdoma
>>>>>>i
>>>>>>ns
>>>>>>
>>>>>>herpa.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Caa8f41c3bb32452833fb
>>>>>>0
>>>>>>8d
>>>>>>
>>>>>>583411c9b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C63655923802978
>>>>>>5
>>>>>>55
>>>>>>
>>>>>>6&sdata=Zu9S5xPRzulIqUlZ%2FgPEGVs0yjZNiNcPuMvB%2FfirN8E%3D&reserved=0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>%2
>>>>>> Fpublic-domain-maps.html&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.c
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>om%7Cdb3e0b405fdc43cf995108d582ee4e3b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178dec
>>>>>>e
>>>>>>e1
>>>>>> %7
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>C0%7C0%7C636558882380334796&sdata=lhmEgOxJKLHmRSz5JAwCLCuAI0Iqy3cn7QQ
>>>>>>u
>>>>>>%2
>>>>>> FI
>>>>>> aaOfQ%3D&reserved=0
>>>>>>
>>>>>> " If the components of the map are “entirely obvious” the map will
>>>>>>not
>>>>>> be
>>>>>> copyrightable. For example, an outline map of the state of Texas, or
>>>>>> one
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> the US showing the state boundaries is *not* copyrightable. (Not
>>>>>> creative.)
>>>>>> Ditto maps that use standard cartographic conventions, like a survey
>>>>>> map.
>>>>>> (Not original.) "
>>>>>>
>>>>> Right after the passage you quote, it says this:
>>>>>
>>>>> "This is could be a tough call in certain cases
>>>>> (I mean, come on ... “entirely obvious”?) but
>>>>> that's the what the courts have said. Just keep
>>>>> in mind ... what you think is entirely obvious,
>>>>> the mapmaker might contest as creative."
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's see what other PMC members think. To me, the quote I pasted
>>>>> indicates that this is still a controversial area. The definition of
>>>>> "map
>>>>> data", AIUI, has to be tied to facts. So, GIS coordinates, or any
>>>>>other
>>>>> lat/lng fact that is used to create a map is not copyrightable, and
>>>>>any
>>>>> map image produced by the US Government is in the public domain. But
>>>>>I
>>>>> believe there is a gray area around the digitizing of maps. The
>>>>>number
>>>>> of
>>>>> points chosen which create the level of detail of a map could be
>>>>>argued
>>>>> to
>>>>> be a form of expression as well as the line-weights chosen for the
>>>>> lines.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, the provenance/history of how the SVG file you chose became
>>>>>public
>>>>> domain is murky. I was unable to determine where the data points
>>>>>came
>>>>> from.
>>>>>
>>>>> To me, that's one reason why folks on wikimedia are claiming
>>>>>copyright
>>>>> and
>>>>> different licensing on their maps that are essentially digitized from
>>>>> public domain US Government maps. The fact that the data points for
>>>>>the
>>>>> states are different in different SVG files also leads me to believe
>>>>>the
>>>>> data points are not facts. I think the safest and least
>>>>>controversial
>>>>> option is for us to use a map that is in the public domain already.
>>>>> This
>>>>> map [1] seems to have a much simpler public domain provenance. Then
>>>>>I
>>>>> think there is less surface for nitpickers to attack.
>>>>>
>>>>> If other PMC members want to go with the current data you have in the
>>>>> files then I'll defer to them (and you).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> -Alex
>>>>>
>>>>> [1]
>>>>>
>>>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommo
>>>>>n
>>>>>s.
>>>>>
>>>>>wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ABlank_US_map_borders.svg&data=02%7C01%7C
>>>>>a
>>>>>ha
>>>>>
>>>>>rui%40adobe.com%7Caa8f41c3bb32452833fb08d583411c9b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b3443879
>>>>>4
>>>>>ae
>>>>>
>>>>>d2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636559238029785556&sdata=uquU6h9UaHwKQRsd4V6%2B
>>>>>H
>>>>>Pu
>>>>> MK6cvP8U5Vw7O5WRxCHI%3D&reserved=0
>>>>>
>>>>><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcomm
>>>>>o
>>>>>ns
>>>>>
>>>>>.wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ABlank_US_map_borders.svg&data=02%7C01%7
>>>>>C
>>>>>ah
>>>>>
>>>>>arui%40adobe.com%7Caa8f41c3bb32452833fb08d583411c9b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b344387
>>>>>9
>>>>>4a
>>>>>
>>>>>ed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636559238029785556&sdata=uquU6h9UaHwKQRsd4V6%2
>>>>>B
>>>>>HP
>>>>> uMK6cvP8U5Vw7O5WRxCHI%3D&reserved=0>
>>>
>>
>
Re: Page linked to from license page no longer exists
Posted by Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>.
I think this is the same that happens with MDL examples. There's two
options:
1) fix the problem. In this case seems easy since is only one file
2) remove the example to Royale Extras. If there's no time, this is the
best option
I'm with Alex that is better to solve the problem before start a release
process
My 2ctns...
C.
2018-03-06 18:29 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.invalid>:
> So you want to ship with the controversial situation we have now?
>
> I'm not going to start a release unless we are going to get enough votes
> and not get mired down in further debating of this situation. Also, if
> there is a ruling that requires changes after I start the release then I
> will have wasted time.
>
> IMO, safest plans are to pull the example, or switch to a different set of
> data points that is already Public Domain.
>
> What do others think?
> -Alex
>
> On 3/6/18, 8:42 AM, "Harbs" <ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >I figured I’d wait a couple of weeks. Like I said: I don’t think it
> >should hold up a release if we don’t get an answer immediately.
> >
> >
> >> On Mar 6, 2018, at 6:11 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> It is March 6. How many days should we wait? Especially given that the
> >> current VP Legal as resigned and no replacement has been announced yet?
> >>
> >> Thoughts?
> >> -Alex
> >>
> >> On 3/6/18, 1:03 AM, "Harbs" <ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> The path data appears to be from the CC-BY derivative and not the
> >>>public
> >>> domain original.
> >>>
> >>> I do think we need to either get clarification of replace the path data
> >>> (and possibly SVG file). I’m happy doing it myself.
> >>>
> >>> I have opened a JIRA for an official ruling on the topic. It feels like
> >>> it’s easier to just replace the data than get the ruling, but I think
> >>> this is something which *should* have a ruling. If it’s OK to reuse SVG
> >>> data in Cat B images, folks shouldn’t have to jump through hoops just
> >>> because there’s nothing clear on the topic.
> >>>
> >>> I do think it’s a relatively minor issue and should be classified as a
> >>> bug. It’s not something that should hold up a release if it can’t be
> >>> resolved before the next release. I just created an issue on the topic.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Harbs
> >>>
> >>>> On Mar 6, 2018, at 7:56 AM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>
> >>>>wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Om,
> >>>>
> >>>> Comments inline.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 3/5/18, 3:09 PM, "omuppi1@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> on
> >>>> behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
> >>>> <omuppi1@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> on behalf of
> >>>> bigosmallm@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 2:47 PM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com.invalid
> >
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi Om,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I am not able to follow your logic. I think I've read your full
> >>>>>>email
> >>>>>> and
> >>>>>> have looked at the links. It appears you are trying to say that the
> >>>>>> data
> >>>>>> points we are using came from [1], but to me, [1] seems clearly
> >>>>>>under
> >>>>>> GNU
> >>>>>> Document and CC-BY-SA. The act of removing the state names from the
> >>>>>> data
> >>>>>> in [2] made it a derivative work, and it appears that the author of
> >>>>>> [1]
> >>>>>> says that work is not under Public Domain.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The SVG asset itself is licensed as such. We are not using the svg
> >>>>> asset
> >>>>> anywhere. We are only using the map data which came from some other
> >>>>> source.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Map data is not copyrightable.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Please read the section under "The map wasn’t eligible for copyright
> >>>>>in
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> first place" here:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pu
> >>>>>bl
> >>>>> ic
> >>>>>
> >>>>><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2Fwww.p
> >>>>>ub
> >>>>> lic>
> >>>>> domainsherpa.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2Fdomai
> >>>>>ns
> >>>>>
> >>>>>herpa.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7Caa8f41c3bb32452833fb0
> >>>>>8d
> >>>>>
> >>>>>583411c9b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C636559238029785
> >>>>>55
> >>>>>
> >>>>>6&sdata=Zu9S5xPRzulIqUlZ%2FgPEGVs0yjZNiNcPuMvB%
> 2FfirN8E%3D&reserved=0>
> >>>>>%2
> >>>>> Fpublic-domain-maps.html&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.c
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>om%7Cdb3e0b405fdc43cf995108d582ee4e3b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> ce
> >>>>>e1
> >>>>> %7
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>C0%7C0%7C636558882380334796&sdata=lhmEgOxJKLHmRSz5JAwCLCuAI0Iqy3
> cn7QQu
> >>>>>%2
> >>>>> FI
> >>>>> aaOfQ%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>>
> >>>>> " If the components of the map are “entirely obvious” the map will
> >>>>>not
> >>>>> be
> >>>>> copyrightable. For example, an outline map of the state of Texas, or
> >>>>> one
> >>>>> of
> >>>>> the US showing the state boundaries is *not* copyrightable. (Not
> >>>>> creative.)
> >>>>> Ditto maps that use standard cartographic conventions, like a survey
> >>>>> map.
> >>>>> (Not original.) "
> >>>>>
> >>>> Right after the passage you quote, it says this:
> >>>>
> >>>> "This is could be a tough call in certain cases
> >>>> (I mean, come on ... “entirely obvious”?) but
> >>>> that's the what the courts have said. Just keep
> >>>> in mind ... what you think is entirely obvious,
> >>>> the mapmaker might contest as creative."
> >>>>
> >>>> Let's see what other PMC members think. To me, the quote I pasted
> >>>> indicates that this is still a controversial area. The definition of
> >>>> "map
> >>>> data", AIUI, has to be tied to facts. So, GIS coordinates, or any
> >>>>other
> >>>> lat/lng fact that is used to create a map is not copyrightable, and
> >>>>any
> >>>> map image produced by the US Government is in the public domain. But
> >>>>I
> >>>> believe there is a gray area around the digitizing of maps. The
> >>>>number
> >>>> of
> >>>> points chosen which create the level of detail of a map could be
> >>>>argued
> >>>> to
> >>>> be a form of expression as well as the line-weights chosen for the
> >>>> lines.
> >>>>
> >>>> Also, the provenance/history of how the SVG file you chose became
> >>>>public
> >>>> domain is murky. I was unable to determine where the data points came
> >>>> from.
> >>>>
> >>>> To me, that's one reason why folks on wikimedia are claiming copyright
> >>>> and
> >>>> different licensing on their maps that are essentially digitized from
> >>>> public domain US Government maps. The fact that the data points for
> >>>>the
> >>>> states are different in different SVG files also leads me to believe
> >>>>the
> >>>> data points are not facts. I think the safest and least controversial
> >>>> option is for us to use a map that is in the public domain already.
> >>>> This
> >>>> map [1] seems to have a much simpler public domain provenance. Then I
> >>>> think there is less surface for nitpickers to attack.
> >>>>
> >>>> If other PMC members want to go with the current data you have in the
> >>>> files then I'll defer to them (and you).
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> -Alex
> >>>>
> >>>> [1]
> >>>>
> >>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fcommon
> >>>>s.
> >>>>
> >>>>wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ABlank_US_map_borders.
> svg&data=02%7C01%7Ca
> >>>>ha
> >>>>
> >>>>rui%40adobe.com%7Caa8f41c3bb32452833fb08d58341
> 1c9b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794
> >>>>ae
> >>>>
> >>>>d2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636559238029785556&sdata=
> uquU6h9UaHwKQRsd4V6%2BH
> >>>>Pu
> >>>> MK6cvP8U5Vw7O5WRxCHI%3D&reserved=0
> >>>>
> >>>><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fcommo
> >>>>ns
> >>>>
> >>>>.wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ABlank_US_map_borders.
> svg&data=02%7C01%7C
> >>>>ah
> >>>>
> >>>>arui%40adobe.com%7Caa8f41c3bb32452833fb08d58341
> 1c9b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b3443879
> >>>>4a
> >>>>
> >>>>ed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636559238029785556&sdata=
> uquU6h9UaHwKQRsd4V6%2B
> >>>>HP
> >>>> uMK6cvP8U5Vw7O5WRxCHI%3D&reserved=0>
> >>
> >
>
>
--
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira
Re: Page linked to from license page no longer exists
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>.
So you want to ship with the controversial situation we have now?
I'm not going to start a release unless we are going to get enough votes
and not get mired down in further debating of this situation. Also, if
there is a ruling that requires changes after I start the release then I
will have wasted time.
IMO, safest plans are to pull the example, or switch to a different set of
data points that is already Public Domain.
What do others think?
-Alex
On 3/6/18, 8:42 AM, "Harbs" <ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>I figured I’d wait a couple of weeks. Like I said: I don’t think it
>should hold up a release if we don’t get an answer immediately.
>
>
>> On Mar 6, 2018, at 6:11 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID> wrote:
>>
>> It is March 6. How many days should we wait? Especially given that the
>> current VP Legal as resigned and no replacement has been announced yet?
>>
>> Thoughts?
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 3/6/18, 1:03 AM, "Harbs" <ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The path data appears to be from the CC-BY derivative and not the
>>>public
>>> domain original.
>>>
>>> I do think we need to either get clarification of replace the path data
>>> (and possibly SVG file). I’m happy doing it myself.
>>>
>>> I have opened a JIRA for an official ruling on the topic. It feels like
>>> it’s easier to just replace the data than get the ruling, but I think
>>> this is something which *should* have a ruling. If it’s OK to reuse SVG
>>> data in Cat B images, folks shouldn’t have to jump through hoops just
>>> because there’s nothing clear on the topic.
>>>
>>> I do think it’s a relatively minor issue and should be classified as a
>>> bug. It’s not something that should hold up a release if it can’t be
>>> resolved before the next release. I just created an issue on the topic.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Harbs
>>>
>>>> On Mar 6, 2018, at 7:56 AM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Om,
>>>>
>>>> Comments inline.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 3/5/18, 3:09 PM, "omuppi1@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> on
>>>> behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
>>>> <omuppi1@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> on behalf of
>>>> bigosmallm@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 2:47 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.invalid>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Om,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am not able to follow your logic. I think I've read your full
>>>>>>email
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> have looked at the links. It appears you are trying to say that the
>>>>>> data
>>>>>> points we are using came from [1], but to me, [1] seems clearly
>>>>>>under
>>>>>> GNU
>>>>>> Document and CC-BY-SA. The act of removing the state names from the
>>>>>> data
>>>>>> in [2] made it a derivative work, and it appears that the author of
>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>> says that work is not under Public Domain.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The SVG asset itself is licensed as such. We are not using the svg
>>>>> asset
>>>>> anywhere. We are only using the map data which came from some other
>>>>> source.
>>>>>
>>>>> Map data is not copyrightable.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please read the section under "The map wasn’t eligible for copyright
>>>>>in
>>>>> the
>>>>> first place" here:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pu
>>>>>bl
>>>>> ic
>>>>>
>>>>><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.p
>>>>>ub
>>>>> lic>
>>>>> domainsherpa.com
>>>>>
>>>>><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdomai
>>>>>ns
>>>>>
>>>>>herpa.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Caa8f41c3bb32452833fb0
>>>>>8d
>>>>>
>>>>>583411c9b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636559238029785
>>>>>55
>>>>>
>>>>>6&sdata=Zu9S5xPRzulIqUlZ%2FgPEGVs0yjZNiNcPuMvB%2FfirN8E%3D&reserved=0>
>>>>>%2
>>>>> Fpublic-domain-maps.html&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.c
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>om%7Cdb3e0b405fdc43cf995108d582ee4e3b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178dece
>>>>>e1
>>>>> %7
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>C0%7C0%7C636558882380334796&sdata=lhmEgOxJKLHmRSz5JAwCLCuAI0Iqy3cn7QQu
>>>>>%2
>>>>> FI
>>>>> aaOfQ%3D&reserved=0
>>>>>
>>>>> " If the components of the map are “entirely obvious” the map will
>>>>>not
>>>>> be
>>>>> copyrightable. For example, an outline map of the state of Texas, or
>>>>> one
>>>>> of
>>>>> the US showing the state boundaries is *not* copyrightable. (Not
>>>>> creative.)
>>>>> Ditto maps that use standard cartographic conventions, like a survey
>>>>> map.
>>>>> (Not original.) "
>>>>>
>>>> Right after the passage you quote, it says this:
>>>>
>>>> "This is could be a tough call in certain cases
>>>> (I mean, come on ... “entirely obvious”?) but
>>>> that's the what the courts have said. Just keep
>>>> in mind ... what you think is entirely obvious,
>>>> the mapmaker might contest as creative."
>>>>
>>>> Let's see what other PMC members think. To me, the quote I pasted
>>>> indicates that this is still a controversial area. The definition of
>>>> "map
>>>> data", AIUI, has to be tied to facts. So, GIS coordinates, or any
>>>>other
>>>> lat/lng fact that is used to create a map is not copyrightable, and
>>>>any
>>>> map image produced by the US Government is in the public domain. But
>>>>I
>>>> believe there is a gray area around the digitizing of maps. The
>>>>number
>>>> of
>>>> points chosen which create the level of detail of a map could be
>>>>argued
>>>> to
>>>> be a form of expression as well as the line-weights chosen for the
>>>> lines.
>>>>
>>>> Also, the provenance/history of how the SVG file you chose became
>>>>public
>>>> domain is murky. I was unable to determine where the data points came
>>>> from.
>>>>
>>>> To me, that's one reason why folks on wikimedia are claiming copyright
>>>> and
>>>> different licensing on their maps that are essentially digitized from
>>>> public domain US Government maps. The fact that the data points for
>>>>the
>>>> states are different in different SVG files also leads me to believe
>>>>the
>>>> data points are not facts. I think the safest and least controversial
>>>> option is for us to use a map that is in the public domain already.
>>>> This
>>>> map [1] seems to have a much simpler public domain provenance. Then I
>>>> think there is less surface for nitpickers to attack.
>>>>
>>>> If other PMC members want to go with the current data you have in the
>>>> files then I'll defer to them (and you).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> -Alex
>>>>
>>>> [1]
>>>>
>>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommon
>>>>s.
>>>>
>>>>wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ABlank_US_map_borders.svg&data=02%7C01%7Ca
>>>>ha
>>>>
>>>>rui%40adobe.com%7Caa8f41c3bb32452833fb08d583411c9b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794
>>>>ae
>>>>
>>>>d2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636559238029785556&sdata=uquU6h9UaHwKQRsd4V6%2BH
>>>>Pu
>>>> MK6cvP8U5Vw7O5WRxCHI%3D&reserved=0
>>>>
>>>><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommo
>>>>ns
>>>>
>>>>.wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ABlank_US_map_borders.svg&data=02%7C01%7C
>>>>ah
>>>>
>>>>arui%40adobe.com%7Caa8f41c3bb32452833fb08d583411c9b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b3443879
>>>>4a
>>>>
>>>>ed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636559238029785556&sdata=uquU6h9UaHwKQRsd4V6%2B
>>>>HP
>>>> uMK6cvP8U5Vw7O5WRxCHI%3D&reserved=0>
>>
>
Re: Page linked to from license page no longer exists
Posted by Harbs <ha...@gmail.com>.
I figured I’d wait a couple of weeks. Like I said: I don’t think it should hold up a release if we don’t get an answer immediately.
> On Mar 6, 2018, at 6:11 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID> wrote:
>
> It is March 6. How many days should we wait? Especially given that the
> current VP Legal as resigned and no replacement has been announced yet?
>
> Thoughts?
> -Alex
>
> On 3/6/18, 1:03 AM, "Harbs" <ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The path data appears to be from the CC-BY derivative and not the public
>> domain original.
>>
>> I do think we need to either get clarification of replace the path data
>> (and possibly SVG file). I’m happy doing it myself.
>>
>> I have opened a JIRA for an official ruling on the topic. It feels like
>> it’s easier to just replace the data than get the ruling, but I think
>> this is something which *should* have a ruling. If it’s OK to reuse SVG
>> data in Cat B images, folks shouldn’t have to jump through hoops just
>> because there’s nothing clear on the topic.
>>
>> I do think it’s a relatively minor issue and should be classified as a
>> bug. It’s not something that should hold up a release if it can’t be
>> resolved before the next release. I just created an issue on the topic.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Harbs
>>
>>> On Mar 6, 2018, at 7:56 AM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Om,
>>>
>>> Comments inline.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/5/18, 3:09 PM, "omuppi1@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> on
>>> behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
>>> <omuppi1@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> on behalf of
>>> bigosmallm@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 2:47 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.invalid>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Om,
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not able to follow your logic. I think I've read your full email
>>>>> and
>>>>> have looked at the links. It appears you are trying to say that the
>>>>> data
>>>>> points we are using came from [1], but to me, [1] seems clearly under
>>>>> GNU
>>>>> Document and CC-BY-SA. The act of removing the state names from the
>>>>> data
>>>>> in [2] made it a derivative work, and it appears that the author of
>>>>> [1]
>>>>> says that work is not under Public Domain.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The SVG asset itself is licensed as such. We are not using the svg
>>>> asset
>>>> anywhere. We are only using the map data which came from some other
>>>> source.
>>>>
>>>> Map data is not copyrightable.
>>>>
>>>> Please read the section under "The map wasn’t eligible for copyright in
>>>> the
>>>> first place" here:
>>>>
>>>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.publ
>>>> ic
>>>> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pub
>>>> lic>
>>>> domainsherpa.com
>>>> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdomains
>>>> herpa.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Caa8f41c3bb32452833fb08d
>>>> 583411c9b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C63655923802978555
>>>> 6&sdata=Zu9S5xPRzulIqUlZ%2FgPEGVs0yjZNiNcPuMvB%2FfirN8E%3D&reserved=0>%2
>>>> Fpublic-domain-maps.html&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.c
>>>>
>>>> om%7Cdb3e0b405fdc43cf995108d582ee4e3b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1
>>>> %7
>>>>
>>>> C0%7C0%7C636558882380334796&sdata=lhmEgOxJKLHmRSz5JAwCLCuAI0Iqy3cn7QQu%2
>>>> FI
>>>> aaOfQ%3D&reserved=0
>>>>
>>>> " If the components of the map are “entirely obvious” the map will not
>>>> be
>>>> copyrightable. For example, an outline map of the state of Texas, or
>>>> one
>>>> of
>>>> the US showing the state boundaries is *not* copyrightable. (Not
>>>> creative.)
>>>> Ditto maps that use standard cartographic conventions, like a survey
>>>> map.
>>>> (Not original.) "
>>>>
>>> Right after the passage you quote, it says this:
>>>
>>> "This is could be a tough call in certain cases
>>> (I mean, come on ... “entirely obvious”?) but
>>> that's the what the courts have said. Just keep
>>> in mind ... what you think is entirely obvious,
>>> the mapmaker might contest as creative."
>>>
>>> Let's see what other PMC members think. To me, the quote I pasted
>>> indicates that this is still a controversial area. The definition of
>>> "map
>>> data", AIUI, has to be tied to facts. So, GIS coordinates, or any other
>>> lat/lng fact that is used to create a map is not copyrightable, and any
>>> map image produced by the US Government is in the public domain. But I
>>> believe there is a gray area around the digitizing of maps. The number
>>> of
>>> points chosen which create the level of detail of a map could be argued
>>> to
>>> be a form of expression as well as the line-weights chosen for the
>>> lines.
>>>
>>> Also, the provenance/history of how the SVG file you chose became public
>>> domain is murky. I was unable to determine where the data points came
>>> from.
>>>
>>> To me, that's one reason why folks on wikimedia are claiming copyright
>>> and
>>> different licensing on their maps that are essentially digitized from
>>> public domain US Government maps. The fact that the data points for the
>>> states are different in different SVG files also leads me to believe the
>>> data points are not facts. I think the safest and least controversial
>>> option is for us to use a map that is in the public domain already.
>>> This
>>> map [1] seems to have a much simpler public domain provenance. Then I
>>> think there is less surface for nitpickers to attack.
>>>
>>> If other PMC members want to go with the current data you have in the
>>> files then I'll defer to them (and you).
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> -Alex
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommons.
>>> wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ABlank_US_map_borders.svg&data=02%7C01%7Caha
>>> rui%40adobe.com%7Caa8f41c3bb32452833fb08d583411c9b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794ae
>>> d2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636559238029785556&sdata=uquU6h9UaHwKQRsd4V6%2BHPu
>>> MK6cvP8U5Vw7O5WRxCHI%3D&reserved=0
>>> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommons
>>> .wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ABlank_US_map_borders.svg&data=02%7C01%7Cah
>>> arui%40adobe.com%7Caa8f41c3bb32452833fb08d583411c9b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794a
>>> ed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636559238029785556&sdata=uquU6h9UaHwKQRsd4V6%2BHP
>>> uMK6cvP8U5Vw7O5WRxCHI%3D&reserved=0>
>
Re: Page linked to from license page no longer exists
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>.
It is March 6. How many days should we wait? Especially given that the
current VP Legal as resigned and no replacement has been announced yet?
Thoughts?
-Alex
On 3/6/18, 1:03 AM, "Harbs" <ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>The path data appears to be from the CC-BY derivative and not the public
>domain original.
>
>I do think we need to either get clarification of replace the path data
>(and possibly SVG file). I’m happy doing it myself.
>
>I have opened a JIRA for an official ruling on the topic. It feels like
>it’s easier to just replace the data than get the ruling, but I think
>this is something which *should* have a ruling. If it’s OK to reuse SVG
>data in Cat B images, folks shouldn’t have to jump through hoops just
>because there’s nothing clear on the topic.
>
>I do think it’s a relatively minor issue and should be classified as a
>bug. It’s not something that should hold up a release if it can’t be
>resolved before the next release. I just created an issue on the topic.
>
>Thanks,
>Harbs
>
>> On Mar 6, 2018, at 7:56 AM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Om,
>>
>> Comments inline.
>>
>>
>> On 3/5/18, 3:09 PM, "omuppi1@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> on
>>behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
>> <omuppi1@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> on behalf of
>>bigosmallm@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 2:47 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Om,
>>>>
>>>> I am not able to follow your logic. I think I've read your full email
>>>> and
>>>> have looked at the links. It appears you are trying to say that the
>>>> data
>>>> points we are using came from [1], but to me, [1] seems clearly under
>>>> GNU
>>>> Document and CC-BY-SA. The act of removing the state names from the
>>>> data
>>>> in [2] made it a derivative work, and it appears that the author of
>>>>[1]
>>>> says that work is not under Public Domain.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The SVG asset itself is licensed as such. We are not using the svg
>>>asset
>>> anywhere. We are only using the map data which came from some other
>>> source.
>>>
>>> Map data is not copyrightable.
>>>
>>> Please read the section under "The map wasn’t eligible for copyright in
>>> the
>>> first place" here:
>>>
>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.publ
>>>ic
>>><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pub
>>>lic>
>>> domainsherpa.com
>>><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdomains
>>>herpa.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Caa8f41c3bb32452833fb08d
>>>583411c9b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C63655923802978555
>>>6&sdata=Zu9S5xPRzulIqUlZ%2FgPEGVs0yjZNiNcPuMvB%2FfirN8E%3D&reserved=0>%2
>>>Fpublic-domain-maps.html&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.c
>>>
>>>om%7Cdb3e0b405fdc43cf995108d582ee4e3b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1
>>>%7
>>>
>>>C0%7C0%7C636558882380334796&sdata=lhmEgOxJKLHmRSz5JAwCLCuAI0Iqy3cn7QQu%2
>>>FI
>>> aaOfQ%3D&reserved=0
>>>
>>> " If the components of the map are “entirely obvious” the map will not
>>>be
>>> copyrightable. For example, an outline map of the state of Texas, or
>>>one
>>> of
>>> the US showing the state boundaries is *not* copyrightable. (Not
>>> creative.)
>>> Ditto maps that use standard cartographic conventions, like a survey
>>>map.
>>> (Not original.) "
>>>
>> Right after the passage you quote, it says this:
>>
>> "This is could be a tough call in certain cases
>> (I mean, come on ... “entirely obvious”?) but
>> that's the what the courts have said. Just keep
>> in mind ... what you think is entirely obvious,
>> the mapmaker might contest as creative."
>>
>> Let's see what other PMC members think. To me, the quote I pasted
>> indicates that this is still a controversial area. The definition of
>>"map
>> data", AIUI, has to be tied to facts. So, GIS coordinates, or any other
>> lat/lng fact that is used to create a map is not copyrightable, and any
>> map image produced by the US Government is in the public domain. But I
>> believe there is a gray area around the digitizing of maps. The number
>>of
>> points chosen which create the level of detail of a map could be argued
>>to
>> be a form of expression as well as the line-weights chosen for the
>>lines.
>>
>> Also, the provenance/history of how the SVG file you chose became public
>> domain is murky. I was unable to determine where the data points came
>> from.
>>
>> To me, that's one reason why folks on wikimedia are claiming copyright
>>and
>> different licensing on their maps that are essentially digitized from
>> public domain US Government maps. The fact that the data points for the
>> states are different in different SVG files also leads me to believe the
>> data points are not facts. I think the safest and least controversial
>> option is for us to use a map that is in the public domain already.
>>This
>> map [1] seems to have a much simpler public domain provenance. Then I
>> think there is less surface for nitpickers to attack.
>>
>> If other PMC members want to go with the current data you have in the
>> files then I'll defer to them (and you).
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Alex
>>
>> [1]
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommons.
>>wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ABlank_US_map_borders.svg&data=02%7C01%7Caha
>>rui%40adobe.com%7Caa8f41c3bb32452833fb08d583411c9b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794ae
>>d2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636559238029785556&sdata=uquU6h9UaHwKQRsd4V6%2BHPu
>>MK6cvP8U5Vw7O5WRxCHI%3D&reserved=0
>><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommons
>>.wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ABlank_US_map_borders.svg&data=02%7C01%7Cah
>>arui%40adobe.com%7Caa8f41c3bb32452833fb08d583411c9b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794a
>>ed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636559238029785556&sdata=uquU6h9UaHwKQRsd4V6%2BHP
>>uMK6cvP8U5Vw7O5WRxCHI%3D&reserved=0>
Re: Page linked to from license page no longer exists
Posted by Harbs <ha...@gmail.com>.
The path data appears to be from the CC-BY derivative and not the public domain original.
I do think we need to either get clarification of replace the path data (and possibly SVG file). I’m happy doing it myself.
I have opened a JIRA for an official ruling on the topic. It feels like it’s easier to just replace the data than get the ruling, but I think this is something which *should* have a ruling. If it’s OK to reuse SVG data in Cat B images, folks shouldn’t have to jump through hoops just because there’s nothing clear on the topic.
I do think it’s a relatively minor issue and should be classified as a bug. It’s not something that should hold up a release if it can’t be resolved before the next release. I just created an issue on the topic.
Thanks,
Harbs
> On Mar 6, 2018, at 7:56 AM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID> wrote:
>
> Hi Om,
>
> Comments inline.
>
>
> On 3/5/18, 3:09 PM, "omuppi1@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
> <omuppi1@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com> on behalf of bigosmallm@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 2:47 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Om,
>>>
>>> I am not able to follow your logic. I think I've read your full email
>>> and
>>> have looked at the links. It appears you are trying to say that the
>>> data
>>> points we are using came from [1], but to me, [1] seems clearly under
>>> GNU
>>> Document and CC-BY-SA. The act of removing the state names from the
>>> data
>>> in [2] made it a derivative work, and it appears that the author of [1]
>>> says that work is not under Public Domain.
>>>
>>
>> The SVG asset itself is licensed as such. We are not using the svg asset
>> anywhere. We are only using the map data which came from some other
>> source.
>>
>> Map data is not copyrightable.
>>
>> Please read the section under "The map wasn’t eligible for copyright in
>> the
>> first place" here:
>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.public <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.public>
>> domainsherpa.com <http://domainsherpa.com/>%2Fpublic-domain-maps.html&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.c
>> om%7Cdb3e0b405fdc43cf995108d582ee4e3b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7
>> C0%7C0%7C636558882380334796&sdata=lhmEgOxJKLHmRSz5JAwCLCuAI0Iqy3cn7QQu%2FI
>> aaOfQ%3D&reserved=0
>>
>> " If the components of the map are “entirely obvious” the map will not be
>> copyrightable. For example, an outline map of the state of Texas, or one
>> of
>> the US showing the state boundaries is *not* copyrightable. (Not
>> creative.)
>> Ditto maps that use standard cartographic conventions, like a survey map.
>> (Not original.) "
>>
> Right after the passage you quote, it says this:
>
> "This is could be a tough call in certain cases
> (I mean, come on ... “entirely obvious”?) but
> that's the what the courts have said. Just keep
> in mind ... what you think is entirely obvious,
> the mapmaker might contest as creative."
>
> Let's see what other PMC members think. To me, the quote I pasted
> indicates that this is still a controversial area. The definition of "map
> data", AIUI, has to be tied to facts. So, GIS coordinates, or any other
> lat/lng fact that is used to create a map is not copyrightable, and any
> map image produced by the US Government is in the public domain. But I
> believe there is a gray area around the digitizing of maps. The number of
> points chosen which create the level of detail of a map could be argued to
> be a form of expression as well as the line-weights chosen for the lines.
>
> Also, the provenance/history of how the SVG file you chose became public
> domain is murky. I was unable to determine where the data points came
> from.
>
> To me, that's one reason why folks on wikimedia are claiming copyright and
> different licensing on their maps that are essentially digitized from
> public domain US Government maps. The fact that the data points for the
> states are different in different SVG files also leads me to believe the
> data points are not facts. I think the safest and least controversial
> option is for us to use a map that is in the public domain already. This
> map [1] seems to have a much simpler public domain provenance. Then I
> think there is less surface for nitpickers to attack.
>
> If other PMC members want to go with the current data you have in the
> files then I'll defer to them (and you).
>
>
> Thanks,
> -Alex
>
> [1] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blank_US_map_borders.svg <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blank_US_map_borders.svg>
Re: Page linked to from license page no longer exists
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>.
Hi Om,
Comments inline.
On 3/5/18, 3:09 PM, "omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
<omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of bigosmallm@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 2:47 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.invalid>
>wrote:
>
>> Hi Om,
>>
>> I am not able to follow your logic. I think I've read your full email
>>and
>> have looked at the links. It appears you are trying to say that the
>>data
>> points we are using came from [1], but to me, [1] seems clearly under
>>GNU
>> Document and CC-BY-SA. The act of removing the state names from the
>>data
>> in [2] made it a derivative work, and it appears that the author of [1]
>> says that work is not under Public Domain.
>>
>
>The SVG asset itself is licensed as such. We are not using the svg asset
>anywhere. We are only using the map data which came from some other
>source.
>
>Map data is not copyrightable.
>
>Please read the section under "The map wasn’t eligible for copyright in
>the
>first place" here:
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.public
>domainsherpa.com%2Fpublic-domain-maps.html&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.c
>om%7Cdb3e0b405fdc43cf995108d582ee4e3b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7
>C0%7C0%7C636558882380334796&sdata=lhmEgOxJKLHmRSz5JAwCLCuAI0Iqy3cn7QQu%2FI
>aaOfQ%3D&reserved=0
>
>" If the components of the map are “entirely obvious” the map will not be
>copyrightable. For example, an outline map of the state of Texas, or one
>of
>the US showing the state boundaries is *not* copyrightable. (Not
>creative.)
>Ditto maps that use standard cartographic conventions, like a survey map.
>(Not original.) "
>
Right after the passage you quote, it says this:
"This is could be a tough call in certain cases
(I mean, come on ... “entirely obvious”?) but
that's the what the courts have said. Just keep
in mind ... what you think is entirely obvious,
the mapmaker might contest as creative."
Let's see what other PMC members think. To me, the quote I pasted
indicates that this is still a controversial area. The definition of "map
data", AIUI, has to be tied to facts. So, GIS coordinates, or any other
lat/lng fact that is used to create a map is not copyrightable, and any
map image produced by the US Government is in the public domain. But I
believe there is a gray area around the digitizing of maps. The number of
points chosen which create the level of detail of a map could be argued to
be a form of expression as well as the line-weights chosen for the lines.
Also, the provenance/history of how the SVG file you chose became public
domain is murky. I was unable to determine where the data points came
from.
To me, that's one reason why folks on wikimedia are claiming copyright and
different licensing on their maps that are essentially digitized from
public domain US Government maps. The fact that the data points for the
states are different in different SVG files also leads me to believe the
data points are not facts. I think the safest and least controversial
option is for us to use a map that is in the public domain already. This
map [1] seems to have a much simpler public domain provenance. Then I
think there is less surface for nitpickers to attack.
If other PMC members want to go with the current data you have in the
files then I'll defer to them (and you).
Thanks,
-Alex
[1] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blank_US_map_borders.svg
Re: Page linked to from license page no longer exists
Posted by OmPrakash Muppirala <bi...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 2:47 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.invalid> wrote:
> Hi Om,
>
> I am not able to follow your logic. I think I've read your full email and
> have looked at the links. It appears you are trying to say that the data
> points we are using came from [1], but to me, [1] seems clearly under GNU
> Document and CC-BY-SA. The act of removing the state names from the data
> in [2] made it a derivative work, and it appears that the author of [1]
> says that work is not under Public Domain.
>
The SVG asset itself is licensed as such. We are not using the svg asset
anywhere. We are only using the map data which came from some other source.
Map data is not copyrightable.
Please read the section under "The map wasn’t eligible for copyright in the
first place" here:
http://www.publicdomainsherpa.com/public-domain-maps.html
" If the components of the map are “entirely obvious” the map will not be
copyrightable. For example, an outline map of the state of Texas, or one of
the US showing the state boundaries is *not* copyrightable. (Not creative.)
Ditto maps that use standard cartographic conventions, like a survey map.
(Not original.) "
>
> If the data points we are using are the same as in [2], then we should say
> that our example is based on a subset of [2] not [1].
>
Probably.
>
> Is that the case? If I download [2], will I see the same data points as
> in our example?
>
From what I see, the data is very similar with an offset to account for
something else that was modified in the new version.
>
> Thanks,
> -Alex
>
> On 3/5/18, 2:13 PM, "omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
> <omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of bigosmallm@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >I consider this issue resolved (please read my full email). You are
> >welcome to take this to Legal Discuss if you wish.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Om
> >
> >On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 1:08 PM, Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> HI,
> >>
> >> > Thanks for the explanation. I think I see where the disconnect is
> >>now.
> >> > Here is what I based my decision on:
> >> >
> >> > The artifact I used [1] is based on the author's own earlier work
> >> available at [2]
> >>
> >> The original author of [1] is “Theshibboleth” while the author of [2] is
> >> "User:Scott5114” so it doesn’t look like that the authors were the same.
> >>
> >> The file at [1] (if you look at the files history) has had several
> >>changes
> >> made to it. Note that in the second top comment the entire map data was
> >> replaced ("Using User:Karlfk's updated map from here, with better
> >>defined
> >> state borders”) by [3] , that map is licensed CC-SA. Which version of
> >>the
> >> file did you use?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Justin
> >>
> >> 1.
> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommons
> .
> >>wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ABlank_US_Map_(states_only).
> svg&data=02%7C01
> >>%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C8efd1e5b328a4c3ba91b08d582e6
> 5e43%7Cfa7b1b5a7b3443
> >>8794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636558848315300865&sdata=
> UU7datdoo3xsaTpIW3t
> >>%2FsVe6I3ZvUSmt3ad%2BO3yVuEk%3D&reserved=0
> >> 2.
> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommons
> .
> >>wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3AElectoral_map_2004-2008.svg&
> data=02%7C01%7C
> >>aharui%40adobe.com%7C8efd1e5b328a4c3ba91b08d582e6
> 5e43%7Cfa7b1b5a7b3443879
> >>4aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636558848315300865&sdata=
> CIPyZZ0STHUdb8GEjqwjGA
> >>5ZA%2FRw0KcUljfhKM9s74w%3D&reserved=0
> >> 3.
> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommons
> .
> >>wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3AElectoralCollege2016.svg&
> data=02%7C01%7Caha
> >>rui%40adobe.com%7C8efd1e5b328a4c3ba91b08d582e6
> 5e43%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794ae
> >>d2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636558848315300865&sdata=
> qBAZx16BFuiqwdpV%2FzJnGxp
> >>CCxz4qJ56r5m%2BnMff6Ws%3D&reserved=0
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
Re: Page linked to from license page no longer exists
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>.
Hi Om,
I am not able to follow your logic. I think I've read your full email and
have looked at the links. It appears you are trying to say that the data
points we are using came from [1], but to me, [1] seems clearly under GNU
Document and CC-BY-SA. The act of removing the state names from the data
in [2] made it a derivative work, and it appears that the author of [1]
says that work is not under Public Domain.
If the data points we are using are the same as in [2], then we should say
that our example is based on a subset of [2] not [1].
Is that the case? If I download [2], will I see the same data points as
in our example?
Thanks,
-Alex
On 3/5/18, 2:13 PM, "omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
<omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of bigosmallm@gmail.com> wrote:
>I consider this issue resolved (please read my full email). You are
>welcome to take this to Legal Discuss if you wish.
>
>Thanks,
>Om
>
>On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 1:08 PM, Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>
>wrote:
>
>> HI,
>>
>> > Thanks for the explanation. I think I see where the disconnect is
>>now.
>> > Here is what I based my decision on:
>> >
>> > The artifact I used [1] is based on the author's own earlier work
>> available at [2]
>>
>> The original author of [1] is “Theshibboleth” while the author of [2] is
>> "User:Scott5114” so it doesn’t look like that the authors were the same.
>>
>> The file at [1] (if you look at the files history) has had several
>>changes
>> made to it. Note that in the second top comment the entire map data was
>> replaced ("Using User:Karlfk's updated map from here, with better
>>defined
>> state borders”) by [3] , that map is licensed CC-SA. Which version of
>>the
>> file did you use?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Justin
>>
>> 1.
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommons.
>>wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ABlank_US_Map_(states_only).svg&data=02%7C01
>>%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C8efd1e5b328a4c3ba91b08d582e65e43%7Cfa7b1b5a7b3443
>>8794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636558848315300865&sdata=UU7datdoo3xsaTpIW3t
>>%2FsVe6I3ZvUSmt3ad%2BO3yVuEk%3D&reserved=0
>> 2.
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommons.
>>wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3AElectoral_map_2004-2008.svg&data=02%7C01%7C
>>aharui%40adobe.com%7C8efd1e5b328a4c3ba91b08d582e65e43%7Cfa7b1b5a7b3443879
>>4aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636558848315300865&sdata=CIPyZZ0STHUdb8GEjqwjGA
>>5ZA%2FRw0KcUljfhKM9s74w%3D&reserved=0
>> 3.
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommons.
>>wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3AElectoralCollege2016.svg&data=02%7C01%7Caha
>>rui%40adobe.com%7C8efd1e5b328a4c3ba91b08d582e65e43%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794ae
>>d2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636558848315300865&sdata=qBAZx16BFuiqwdpV%2FzJnGxp
>>CCxz4qJ56r5m%2BnMff6Ws%3D&reserved=0
>>
>>
>>
Re: Page linked to from license page no longer exists
Posted by OmPrakash Muppirala <bi...@gmail.com>.
I consider this issue resolved (please read my full email). You are
welcome to take this to Legal Discuss if you wish.
Thanks,
Om
On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 1:08 PM, Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>
wrote:
> HI,
>
> > Thanks for the explanation. I think I see where the disconnect is now.
> > Here is what I based my decision on:
> >
> > The artifact I used [1] is based on the author's own earlier work
> available at [2]
>
> The original author of [1] is “Theshibboleth” while the author of [2] is
> "User:Scott5114” so it doesn’t look like that the authors were the same.
>
> The file at [1] (if you look at the files history) has had several changes
> made to it. Note that in the second top comment the entire map data was
> replaced ("Using User:Karlfk's updated map from here, with better defined
> state borders”) by [3] , that map is licensed CC-SA. Which version of the
> file did you use?
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
> 1. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blank_US_Map_(states_only).svg
> 2. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Electoral_map_2004-2008.svg
> 3. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ElectoralCollege2016.svg
>
>
>
Re: Page linked to from license page no longer exists
Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
HI,
> Thanks for the explanation. I think I see where the disconnect is now.
> Here is what I based my decision on:
>
> The artifact I used [1] is based on the author's own earlier work available at [2]
The original author of [1] is “Theshibboleth” while the author of [2] is "User:Scott5114” so it doesn’t look like that the authors were the same.
The file at [1] (if you look at the files history) has had several changes made to it. Note that in the second top comment the entire map data was replaced ("Using User:Karlfk's updated map from here, with better defined state borders”) by [3] , that map is licensed CC-SA. Which version of the file did you use?
Thanks,
Justin
1. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blank_US_Map_(states_only).svg
2. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Electoral_map_2004-2008.svg
3. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ElectoralCollege2016.svg
Re: Page linked to from license page no longer exists
Posted by OmPrakash Muppirala <bi...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for the explanation. I think I see where the disconnect is now.
Here is what I based my decision on:
The artifact I used [1] is based on the author's own earlier work available
at [2]
In the Summary > Permission section of [2] it says: " Public domain; use
for any purpose."
I am not creating a derivative work based on the svg, I am merely copying
the map data. As such, map data itself originated from the US government
data which cannot be copyrighted [3]
Finally, as per ASF Legal [4], we are allowed to use works included in the
public domain in Apache Products. Here is the relevant details:
==================================
A work should be treated as being in the public domain when one of the
following applies:
- the work is covered by
- the Creative Commons Public Domain Mark
<http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/>, or
- a suitable dedication (to the public domain) by the authors; or
- clear evidence exists that US copyright for the work
- has expired, or
- cannot be claimed.
==================================
Given that the author of the SVG has placed it under public domain and the
fact that US copyright for the work cannot be claimed, it is okay for us to
use this map data in our product.
Thanks,
Om
[1] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blank_US_Map_(states_only).svg
[2] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Electoral_map_2004-2008.svg
[3]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Derivative_works#What_is_a_derivative_work.3F
[4]
https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#can-works-placed-in-the-public-domain-be-included-in-apache-products
On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 1:04 AM, Harbs <ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The issue is like this:
>
> CC-BY 3.0 is considered Category B which can be included in binary
> (unmodified) form.[1] Including the paths of the SVG in MapCoords is a
> questionable use of Category B and we would need approval from legal to use
> it like that.
>
> We have three options:
> 1. We can ask legal if it’s OK.
> 2. We can pull the example from the Apache repo and put it somewhere else.
> 3. We can switch to a public domain svg such as the one Alex linked to.
>
> Harbs
>
> [1]https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b <
> https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b>
>
> > On Mar 5, 2018, at 10:33 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala <bi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Again, please explain what issue you see.
> >
> > I spent a lot of time on this. I dont feel like redoing all the work
> > without proper justification.
> >
> > You are welcome to rework this if you think it is necessary.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Om
> >
> >
> > On Mar 5, 2018 12:15 AM, "Alex Harui" <ah...@adobe.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Om,
> >
> > Way back in
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/70fd5fa65f60ed35a4d2097c8e2dab
> 19320b6b
> > 549b3f87894789dc27@%3Cdev.royale.apache.org%3E
> > I suggested using
> > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blank_US_map_borders.svg
> >
> > Do you have time to switch us over that instead? I think that will end
> > this controversy. I suppose I can do it if you don't have time.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 3/4/18, 11:11 PM, "omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash
> Muppirala"
> > <omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of bigosmallm@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Justin,
> >>
> >> I have done the necessary due diligence on this issue. I think this
> issue
> >> has been taken care of as per legal requirements.
> >> If you think there are issues, please discuss this with the Legal PMC.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Om
> >>
> >> On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 11:04 PM, Justin Mclean <
> justin@classsoftware.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>>> What is the issue you are seeing? Please describe in detail.
> >>>
> >>> The Royale license currently states:
> >>>
> >>> The map coordinates in examples/native/USStatesMap/src/MapCoords.as
> >>> were placed into the Public Domain by its author. See:
> >>>
> >>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fcommons.
> >>> wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ABlank_US_Map_(states_only).
> svg&data=02%7C01
> >>> %7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C75a703c1aa6d4b2eba1f08d58268
> 7b6d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b3443
> >>> 8794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636558307660165124&sdata=
> lqqrGtWpdwrKUgXp5%2
> >>> FLIa5SSpqqvQVY1Ua79Ua2QTVY%3D&reserved=0
> >>>
> >>> If you look at that URL [1] you see that the svg file is licensed under
> >>> GNU Free Documentation License and the Creative Commons
> >>> Attribution-Share
> >>> Alike 3.0 Unported license.
> >>>
> >>> GNU Free Documentation License is uncategorised (but probably Category
> >>> X
> >>> from a quick look), for CC-SA see [2], also note that the .as file
> would
> >>> probably considered a modified version of the .svg one, also note the
> >>> CC-SA
> >>> license conditions.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Justin
> >>>
> >>> 1.
> >>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fcommons.
> >>> wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ABlank_US_Map_(states_only).
> svg&data=02%7C01
> >>> %7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C75a703c1aa6d4b2eba1f08d58268
> 7b6d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b3443
> >>> 8794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636558307660165124&sdata=
> lqqrGtWpdwrKUgXp5%2
> >>> FLIa5SSpqqvQVY1Ua79Ua2QTVY%3D&reserved=0
> >>> 2.
> >>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apac
> >>> he.org%2Flegal%2Fresolved.html%23cc-sa&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%
> 40adobe.com%
> >>> 7C75a703c1aa6d4b2eba1f08d582687b6d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7C0
> >>> %7C0%7C636558307660165124&sdata=3rVWluxig8qzrVF3HTl4%
> 2B2UESlzUmXEq1Lzuw2t
> >>> WyI8%3D&reserved=0
> >>>
> >>>
>
>
Re: Page linked to from license page no longer exists
Posted by Harbs <ha...@gmail.com>.
The issue is like this:
CC-BY 3.0 is considered Category B which can be included in binary (unmodified) form.[1] Including the paths of the SVG in MapCoords is a questionable use of Category B and we would need approval from legal to use it like that.
We have three options:
1. We can ask legal if it’s OK.
2. We can pull the example from the Apache repo and put it somewhere else.
3. We can switch to a public domain svg such as the one Alex linked to.
Harbs
[1]https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b <https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b>
> On Mar 5, 2018, at 10:33 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Again, please explain what issue you see.
>
> I spent a lot of time on this. I dont feel like redoing all the work
> without proper justification.
>
> You are welcome to rework this if you think it is necessary.
>
> Thanks,
> Om
>
>
> On Mar 5, 2018 12:15 AM, "Alex Harui" <ah...@adobe.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> Hi Om,
>
> Way back in
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/70fd5fa65f60ed35a4d2097c8e2dab19320b6b
> 549b3f87894789dc27@%3Cdev.royale.apache.org%3E
> I suggested using
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blank_US_map_borders.svg
>
> Do you have time to switch us over that instead? I think that will end
> this controversy. I suppose I can do it if you don't have time.
>
> Thanks,
> -Alex
>
> On 3/4/18, 11:11 PM, "omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
> <omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of bigosmallm@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Justin,
>>
>> I have done the necessary due diligence on this issue. I think this issue
>> has been taken care of as per legal requirements.
>> If you think there are issues, please discuss this with the Legal PMC.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Om
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 11:04 PM, Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>> What is the issue you are seeing? Please describe in detail.
>>>
>>> The Royale license currently states:
>>>
>>> The map coordinates in examples/native/USStatesMap/src/MapCoords.as
>>> were placed into the Public Domain by its author. See:
>>>
>>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommons.
>>> wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ABlank_US_Map_(states_only).svg&data=02%7C01
>>> %7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C75a703c1aa6d4b2eba1f08d582687b6d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b3443
>>> 8794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636558307660165124&sdata=lqqrGtWpdwrKUgXp5%2
>>> FLIa5SSpqqvQVY1Ua79Ua2QTVY%3D&reserved=0
>>>
>>> If you look at that URL [1] you see that the svg file is licensed under
>>> GNU Free Documentation License and the Creative Commons
>>> Attribution-Share
>>> Alike 3.0 Unported license.
>>>
>>> GNU Free Documentation License is uncategorised (but probably Category
>>> X
>>> from a quick look), for CC-SA see [2], also note that the .as file would
>>> probably considered a modified version of the .svg one, also note the
>>> CC-SA
>>> license conditions.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Justin
>>>
>>> 1.
>>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommons.
>>> wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ABlank_US_Map_(states_only).svg&data=02%7C01
>>> %7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C75a703c1aa6d4b2eba1f08d582687b6d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b3443
>>> 8794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636558307660165124&sdata=lqqrGtWpdwrKUgXp5%2
>>> FLIa5SSpqqvQVY1Ua79Ua2QTVY%3D&reserved=0
>>> 2.
>>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apac
>>> he.org%2Flegal%2Fresolved.html%23cc-sa&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>>> 7C75a703c1aa6d4b2eba1f08d582687b6d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0
>>> %7C0%7C636558307660165124&sdata=3rVWluxig8qzrVF3HTl4%2B2UESlzUmXEq1Lzuw2t
>>> WyI8%3D&reserved=0
>>>
>>>
Re: Page linked to from license page no longer exists
Posted by OmPrakash Muppirala <bi...@gmail.com>.
Again, please explain what issue you see.
I spent a lot of time on this. I dont feel like redoing all the work
without proper justification.
You are welcome to rework this if you think it is necessary.
Thanks,
Om
On Mar 5, 2018 12:15 AM, "Alex Harui" <ah...@adobe.com.invalid> wrote:
Hi Om,
Way back in
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/70fd5fa65f60ed35a4d2097c8e2dab19320b6b
549b3f87894789dc27@%3Cdev.royale.apache.org%3E
I suggested using
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blank_US_map_borders.svg
Do you have time to switch us over that instead? I think that will end
this controversy. I suppose I can do it if you don't have time.
Thanks,
-Alex
On 3/4/18, 11:11 PM, "omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
<omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of bigosmallm@gmail.com> wrote:
>Justin,
>
>I have done the necessary due diligence on this issue. I think this issue
>has been taken care of as per legal requirements.
>If you think there are issues, please discuss this with the Legal PMC.
>
>Thanks,
>Om
>
>On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 11:04 PM, Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> > What is the issue you are seeing? Please describe in detail.
>>
>> The Royale license currently states:
>>
>> The map coordinates in examples/native/USStatesMap/src/MapCoords.as
>> were placed into the Public Domain by its author. See:
>>
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommons.
>>wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ABlank_US_Map_(states_only).svg&data=02%7C01
>>%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C75a703c1aa6d4b2eba1f08d582687b6d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b3443
>>8794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636558307660165124&sdata=lqqrGtWpdwrKUgXp5%2
>>FLIa5SSpqqvQVY1Ua79Ua2QTVY%3D&reserved=0
>>
>> If you look at that URL [1] you see that the svg file is licensed under
>> GNU Free Documentation License and the Creative Commons
>>Attribution-Share
>> Alike 3.0 Unported license.
>>
>> GNU Free Documentation License is uncategorised (but probably Category
>>X
>> from a quick look), for CC-SA see [2], also note that the .as file would
>> probably considered a modified version of the .svg one, also note the
>>CC-SA
>> license conditions.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Justin
>>
>> 1.
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommons.
>>wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ABlank_US_Map_(states_only).svg&data=02%7C01
>>%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C75a703c1aa6d4b2eba1f08d582687b6d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b3443
>>8794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636558307660165124&sdata=lqqrGtWpdwrKUgXp5%2
>>FLIa5SSpqqvQVY1Ua79Ua2QTVY%3D&reserved=0
>> 2.
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apac
>>he.org%2Flegal%2Fresolved.html%23cc-sa&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>>7C75a703c1aa6d4b2eba1f08d582687b6d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0
>>%7C0%7C636558307660165124&sdata=3rVWluxig8qzrVF3HTl4%2B2UESlzUmXEq1Lzuw2t
>>WyI8%3D&reserved=0
>>
>>
Re: Page linked to from license page no longer exists
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>.
Hi Om,
Way back in
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/70fd5fa65f60ed35a4d2097c8e2dab19320b6b
549b3f87894789dc27@%3Cdev.royale.apache.org%3E
I suggested using
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blank_US_map_borders.svg
Do you have time to switch us over that instead? I think that will end
this controversy. I suppose I can do it if you don't have time.
Thanks,
-Alex
On 3/4/18, 11:11 PM, "omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
<omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of bigosmallm@gmail.com> wrote:
>Justin,
>
>I have done the necessary due diligence on this issue. I think this issue
>has been taken care of as per legal requirements.
>If you think there are issues, please discuss this with the Legal PMC.
>
>Thanks,
>Om
>
>On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 11:04 PM, Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> > What is the issue you are seeing? Please describe in detail.
>>
>> The Royale license currently states:
>>
>> The map coordinates in examples/native/USStatesMap/src/MapCoords.as
>> were placed into the Public Domain by its author. See:
>>
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommons.
>>wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ABlank_US_Map_(states_only).svg&data=02%7C01
>>%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C75a703c1aa6d4b2eba1f08d582687b6d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b3443
>>8794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636558307660165124&sdata=lqqrGtWpdwrKUgXp5%2
>>FLIa5SSpqqvQVY1Ua79Ua2QTVY%3D&reserved=0
>>
>> If you look at that URL [1] you see that the svg file is licensed under
>> GNU Free Documentation License and the Creative Commons
>>Attribution-Share
>> Alike 3.0 Unported license.
>>
>> GNU Free Documentation License is uncategorised (but probably Category
>>X
>> from a quick look), for CC-SA see [2], also note that the .as file would
>> probably considered a modified version of the .svg one, also note the
>>CC-SA
>> license conditions.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Justin
>>
>> 1.
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommons.
>>wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ABlank_US_Map_(states_only).svg&data=02%7C01
>>%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C75a703c1aa6d4b2eba1f08d582687b6d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b3443
>>8794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636558307660165124&sdata=lqqrGtWpdwrKUgXp5%2
>>FLIa5SSpqqvQVY1Ua79Ua2QTVY%3D&reserved=0
>> 2.
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apac
>>he.org%2Flegal%2Fresolved.html%23cc-sa&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>>7C75a703c1aa6d4b2eba1f08d582687b6d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0
>>%7C0%7C636558307660165124&sdata=3rVWluxig8qzrVF3HTl4%2B2UESlzUmXEq1Lzuw2t
>>WyI8%3D&reserved=0
>>
>>
Re: Page linked to from license page no longer exists
Posted by OmPrakash Muppirala <bi...@gmail.com>.
Justin,
I have done the necessary due diligence on this issue. I think this issue
has been taken care of as per legal requirements.
If you think there are issues, please discuss this with the Legal PMC.
Thanks,
Om
On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 11:04 PM, Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > What is the issue you are seeing? Please describe in detail.
>
> The Royale license currently states:
>
> The map coordinates in examples/native/USStatesMap/src/MapCoords.as
> were placed into the Public Domain by its author. See:
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blank_US_Map_(states_only).svg
>
> If you look at that URL [1] you see that the svg file is licensed under
> GNU Free Documentation License and the Creative Commons Attribution-Share
> Alike 3.0 Unported license.
>
> GNU Free Documentation License is uncategorised (but probably Category X
> from a quick look), for CC-SA see [2], also note that the .as file would
> probably considered a modified version of the .svg one, also note the CC-SA
> license conditions.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
> 1. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blank_US_Map_(states_only).svg
> 2. https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#cc-sa
>
>
Re: Page linked to from license page no longer exists
Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,
> What is the issue you are seeing? Please describe in detail.
The Royale license currently states:
The map coordinates in examples/native/USStatesMap/src/MapCoords.as
were placed into the Public Domain by its author. See:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blank_US_Map_(states_only).svg
If you look at that URL [1] you see that the svg file is licensed under GNU Free Documentation License and the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.
GNU Free Documentation License is uncategorised (but probably Category X from a quick look), for CC-SA see [2], also note that the .as file would probably considered a modified version of the .svg one, also note the CC-SA license conditions.
Thanks,
Justin
1. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blank_US_Map_(states_only).svg
2. https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#cc-sa
Re: Page linked to from license page no longer exists
Posted by OmPrakash Muppirala <bi...@gmail.com>.
What is the issue you are seeing? Please describe in detail.
Thanks,
Om
On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 8:28 PM, Justin Mclean <ju...@me.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > I have pushed out a proper fix for this issue here:
> > https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/commit/
> dc117d2ab947fbc3ee7c0d4e7ccefd861457968a <https://github.com/apache/
> royale-asjs/commit/dc117d2ab947fbc3ee7c0d4e7ccefd861457968a>
> Looks like the file linked to still has [1] the same license issue as it’s
> not under a public domain license or do I have the wrong link?
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
> 1. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blank_US_Map_(states_only).svg
Re: Page linked to from license page no longer exists
Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@me.com>.
Hi,
> I have pushed out a proper fix for this issue here:
> https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/commit/dc117d2ab947fbc3ee7c0d4e7ccefd861457968a <https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/commit/dc117d2ab947fbc3ee7c0d4e7ccefd861457968a>
Looks like the file linked to still has [1] the same license issue as it’s not under a public domain license or do I have the wrong link?
Thanks,
Justin
1. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blank_US_Map_(states_only).svg