Allow license.txt file

[Chas_Belov_SFMTA]

We are about to make our GTFS feed available to the public, subject to
a use license. I would like the license to be included in the feed,
just as programs distributed by GPL and LGPL include such a file in
their zipped or tarballed files.

Will it cause Google any issue if the zipped GTFS feed includes a
license.txt file?

[Joe Hughes]

Hi Chas,

You bring up an interesting topic, and I think there are two parts to it:

1) Is it OK to put other files inside of a GTFS zip archive?

Definitely. GTFS parsers should always ignore files (and columns
within files) that they don't understand, in order to facilitate
testing of proposed extensions and other experimentation. The caveat
to this is that if a future update to the spec happens to define that
filename or column name, it would temporarily make the feed invalid.
My recommendation would be to pick a name that was unlikely to be
officially defined in the future, like "sfmta_license.txt".

2) Should GTFS define a standard way to provide license information,
and if so, in what form?

The two most obvious options here are to put the complete text of the
license in a file in the zip archive, as you plan to do, or to put a
URL that points to the license information into one of the tables.
(For instance, we could use a "license_url" field in the
previously-proposed "feed_info.txt".)

Thoughts on this second point?

Joe

[Chas_Belov_SFMTA]

Joe Hughes wrote:
> Hi Chas,
>
> You bring up an interesting topic, and I think there are two parts to it:
>
> 1) Is it OK to put other files inside of a GTFS zip archive?
>
> Definitely. GTFS parsers should always ignore files (and columns
> within files) that they don't understand, in order to facilitate
> testing of proposed extensions and other experimentation. The caveat
> to this is that if a future update to the spec happens to define that
> filename or column name, it would temporarily make the feed invalid.
> My recommendation would be to pick a name that was unlikely to be
> officially defined in the future, like "sfmta_license.txt".

Probably license_from_sftma.txt to put it where folks will expect it,
under "license". Thanks.

> 2) Should GTFS define a standard way to provide license information,
> and if so, in what form?
>
> The two most obvious options here are to put the complete text of the
> license in a file in the zip archive, as you plan to do, or to put a
> URL that points to the license information into one of the tables.
> (For instance, we could use a "license_url" field in the
> previously-proposed "feed_info.txt".)
>
> Thoughts on this second point?
>

As long as the field is optional, and we can still put in a file if we
wish, it works for me.

[Edward Vielmetti]

Under what conditions would the schedule of a public
transit agency be anything other than in the public domain?
I'm curious to see any possible justification for a license
on any document which could be obtained by FOIA. Ed

--
Edward Vielmetti
Ann Arbor, MI

+1 734 330 2465

[Joe Hughes]

Edward,

The focus of this group is developing the technical details of the
GTFS format, so I'd like to avoid topics that could only be answered
by lawyers. (I suspect that few of us group members have the right
credentials to decide the legal aspects either way.)

When releasing their feeds to the public, most agencies have chosen to
put some terms of use on the download page. Given this practice, it's
reasonable to discuss how a feed would indicate this information in a
more uniform way.

Thanks for your understanding,
Joe

[Yuriy Yakimenko]

I originally hoped SFMTA might be Southern Florida. No luck. Hello, folks in Florida!
Wake up, time to share your data with the world. Or I am not going to vote for that another Bush, period.

Yuriy

[Joe Hughes]

This list has over 100 subscribers--please respect their time and
attention by keeping your posts on topic.

Joe

[Nicholas Albion]

Some agencies that provide their feed publicly have a requirement that
you display "Schedule data provided by Xxxx".
Perhaps an optional feed of a feed_metadata.txt could be "disclaimer",
"credits" or "terms of use" (Preferably a one-liner)

On Jan 21, 1:39 pm, Joe Hughes <joe.hughes.c...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Edward,
>
> The focus of this group is developing the technical details of the
> GTFS format, so I'd like to avoid topics that could only be answered
> by lawyers.  (I suspect that few of us group members have the right
> credentials to decide the legal aspects either way.)
>
> When releasing their feeds to the public, most agencies have chosen to
> put some terms of use on the download page.  Given this practice, it's
> reasonable to discuss how a feed would indicate this information in a
> more uniform way.
>
> Thanks for your understanding,
> Joe
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 6:27 PM, Edward Vielmetti
>

[Jehiah Czebotar]

On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 1:12 AM, Nicholas Albion <nal...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Some agencies that provide their feed publicly have a requirement that
> you display "Schedule data provided by Xxxx".
> Perhaps an optional feed of a feed_metadata.txt could be "disclaimer",
> "credits" or "terms of use" (Preferably a one-liner)
>

oh? I'm not aware of any that have that requirement. can you provide
any specific cases to the list, as its always best to make feed schema
decisions based on real world cases.

--
Jehiah

[Jehiah Czebotar]

On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 9:15 PM, Joe Hughes <joe.hug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 2) Should GTFS define a standard way to provide license information,
> and if so, in what form?
>
> The two most obvious options here are to put the complete text of the
> license in a file in the zip archive, as you plan to do, or to put a
> URL that points to the license information into one of the tables.
> (For instance, we could use a "license_url" field in the
> previously-proposed "feed_info.txt".)
>
> Thoughts on this second point?
>
> Joe
>

As a feed consumer, many of the feeds i archive on
gtfs-data-exchange.com have licenses attached to them, and I like the
idea of a license_url in the feed_info.txt proposal as it would make a
common practice (applying a license to a feed) easier. I'm not aware
of any other existing feeds that include the text of the license in
the gtfs file currently, but i think it's fine to include that under a
uniquely named file as Joe mentioned (or perhaphs along with other
text description to developers in a README type file)

For those that are looking, here is the link to the previously
discussed feed_info.txt proposal (which didn't have a license_url)
http://bit.ly/wIOI
and as a reminder all the open proposals are listed here
http://bit.ly/gtfs-proposals

--
Jehiah

[Dale Noll]

Adding a license_url column to feed_info.txt data file would work for a feed wide license. However, in the case of a feed aggregation the licenses/terms of use may not be feed wide. Perhaps there should be a place in the agency.txt for a license_url for each agency that is represented as well.

Dale



>>> Jehiah Czebotar <jeh...@gmail.com> 1/21/2009 12:37 AM >>>

[Matthew Weatherford]

I believe the small agencies I am working with would rather have the
license as part of their feed, maybe a separate .txt file. They
really prefer to keep their web presences as uncomplicated as possible
because they have no staff to maintain them. However, a license.txt or
the like could contain the directions to a URL.