Licensing and why MFM should adopt Creative Commons

[jpatokal]

I've been keeping an eye on MalSingMaps for a while, and I'd first of all like to thank all the volunteers at MFM for spinning off this project and keeping true to the original goals.

But... the reason you got into this mess in the first place is that no proper license was specified, and I think you're about to repeat the same mistake: the "points" are admirable, but they're also unclear, partly contradictory and (probably) not legally valid.

Thus, I think MFM should formally adopt the Creative Commons ShareAlike-Attribution license. This basically says that anybody can use the map, as long as they follow two principles: they have to attribute the map back to MalFreeMaps, and if they modify the map in any way and republish it, they have to share those changes, so they can be put back into MalFreeMaps. And this license will make it legally impossible for somebody to take your work, block off access and start charging money for "MalNotFreeMaps".

Here's an example of why the current "points" are unworkable. I edit a lot over at Wikitravel, the Wikipedia of travel guides, and we'd love to add some MFM maps to our Kuala Lumpur guide... but we can't, because there's no way to tell if the project is "commercial" or not (do Google Ads count? even though everything is CC-licensed and free to use? who decides anyway?), and the points appears to prohibit us from "any editing" of the content, which means that we can't, say, change the colors or number the attractions to make them easier to find on a printed page. Obviously you're aiming at Garmin & co here, but the practical effect is that you're also stopping more or less everybody else from doing anything at all with the maps.

So, that's my two sen. What does the community think?

[OngCC]

Hi jpatokal,

I believe what you want is a print screen of our map in jpg/bmp and some editing on the graphics, right?

Just go ahead, but please remember to credit to malfreemaps.com. And post the URL here.

[moeyhc]

Thank you for your input.

All organizations work on a set of principle that govern its operations. In MFM we adopt an open minded structure to allow members to be a part of our mapping effort. I have not known of any party/ies that has approach MFM to use our maps or data that has been rejected outright. If you have a request that does not satisfy our current terms and conditions you are welcome to write to our Administrator to seek clarifications and approval on your usage. As a hobbyist group we are constantly looking for ways to improve and serve not only our beloved Members but the General Public. Hence, we are flexible when the recipient is reasonable.

Please write to our Administrator to help you achieve your goals. They are here to make our maps better for all to enjoy... cheers!

[ss173b]

I'm very sick and tired of all these topics.....is time to STOP. Otherwise, make your own website.

My two cents worth.

Cheers, Kelvin.



Sick of what, Kelvin? Legal advice not good for MFM? - Antyong

[antyong (retired)]

I've been keeping an eye on MalSingMaps for a while, and I'd first of all like to thank all the volunteers at MFM for spinning off this project and keeping true to the original goals.

But... the reason you got into this mess in the first place is that no proper license was specified, and I think you're about to repeat the same mistake: the "points" are admirable, but they're also unclear, partly contradictory and (probably) not legally valid.

Thus, I think MFM should formally adopt the Creative Commons ShareAlike-Attribution license. This basically says that anybody can use the map, as long as they follow two principles: they have to attribute the map back to MalFreeMaps, and if they modify the map in any way and republish it, they have to share those changes, so they can be put back into MalFreeMaps. And this license will make it legally impossible for somebody to take your work, block off access and start charging money for "MalNotFreeMaps".

Here's an example of why the current "points" are unworkable. I edit a lot over at Wikitravel, the Wikipedia of travel guides, and we'd love to add some MFM maps to our Kuala Lumpur guide... but we can't, because there's no way to tell if the project is "commercial" or not (do Google Ads count? even though everything is CC-licensed and free to use? who decides anyway?), and the points appears to prohibit us from "any editing" of the content, which means that we can't, say, change the colors or number the attractions to make them easier to find on a printed page. Obviously you're aiming at Garmin & co here, but the practical effect is that you're also stopping more or less everybody else from doing anything at all with the maps.

So, that's my two sen. What does the community think?

I agree that we should look into a proper legal framework and Creative Commons probably suits us best. We are however held back by our collective lack of legal expertise. Furthermore, I am doubtful whether we have the means to take legal action against those who infringe our copyright.

We are quite community and hobby-oriented. I have a feeling that any serious legal matter is going leave a bad tastes in everybody's mouth. It will also deviate our focus into improving our maps. It will be a phyrric victory even if we win.

From the start, we have no intention to pursue any legal action. We merely like to point out what is ours

Anyway, appreciate if you can advise further on this matter.

[alyem]

I totally agreed with the legal framework and Creative Commons. With this we can have our own right.

[imantulen]

I agree that we should look into a proper legal framework and Creative Commons probably suits us best. We are however held back by our collective lack of legal expertise. Furthermore, I am doubtful whether we have the means to take legal action against those who infringe our copyright.

We are quite community and hobby-oriented. I have a feeling that any serious legal matter is going leave a bad tastes in everybody's mouth. It will also deviate our focus into improving our maps. It will be a phyrric victory even if we win.

From the start, we have no intention to pursue any legal action. We merely like to point out what is ours

Anyway, appreciate if you can advise further on this matter.

I believe MFM should enlist in to a Creative Commons license to "protect" the contents & prevent blatant misuse of the community's mapping efforts.

My concerns on jurisdictions are readily answered here:
http://creativecommons.org/international/my/

I believe whether MFM is in a position or means to pursue others for infringement is a secondary issue....

I for one, would definitely welcome Jpatokal assistance on this matter...

[SOSweet]

IMHO, its is good to have the “legal framework and Creative Commons” but it will not going to stop and prevent ppl like the blachan angmoh from the other site to reverse engineering MFM maps, and subsequently claimed copyright ownership. As site admin Antyong rightly pointed out, MFM does not have the means (money and time) to take legal action against that culprit. Those scum know this shortcoming, that’s why they boldly use something does not belong to them and claim that they are the rightful owner. They even threaten (in one of the post) to take legal action against anyone who questioned their copyrighted entitlement.

[singawon]

blachan angmoh

Anyway,I think it better to have some forms of legal protection lah....if not later kana blachan lawsuit.....got to go da fei ke.....

[jpatokal]

Wow, that's fast feedback! A few clarifications:

This is about ensuring that MFM's current work is on solid legal ground, and has nothing to do with the existing MFM/MSM split. The aim is a) to prevent something like this from happening again in the future, and b) to clearly lay out the rules for what is allowed and what is not allowed.

Like imantulen says, whether MFM should/wants to/can afford to take legal action is a secondary issue. However, adopting the Creative Commons license would mean that the project is backed by the lawyers of the Creative Commons Foundation, and the Malaysian chapter is even sponsored by the Multimedia Development Corporation. I think most bad guys would think twice before messing with Dr. M

Adopting Creative Commons is really easy: you just attach a notice to your files saying that it's licensed under CC and include the Web address of the license. That's it! So the hard part is really just making sure that the community agrees with this.

And OngCC, thanks for the permission, but unfortunately it's not enough -- Wikitravel (and Wikipedia and many other sites) only accepts public domain (totally free and unrestricted) and Creative Commons content. Otherwise the licensing would be impossibly complicated.

I'll be in KL in April 4-5 for BarCamp KL (@ Inti College, Subang Jaya), and I'd love to meet up with MFM folks and discuss this, either at the un-conference itself (it's 100% free, super relaxed and you even get free makan!) or after/before/near/around it. Pick a time and a place!