On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Frederik Ramm <frede...@remote.org> wrote: > David (& some others), > > David Groom wrote: >> >> I've repeatedly asked where is the explicit permission to use Bing Imagery >> to create derived works, all the only answer is "we have it". As I've said >> before if its there please show us where it is. > > Just out of interest; why are we having this conversation? Is it just to > determine who is right and who is wrong and who was right in the first place > and who gets extra points for being super nitpicking (hello 80n, have you > never written a "final" document and later made a v2 of it?) and who gets to > sit on the golden seat in lawyer heaven? > > Do you *want* to use Bing imagery but feel you cannot? > > Or do you not want to use Bing imagery and are looking for a reason? > > I mean, every now and then I enjoy being a tongue-in-cheek smartass myself, > but somehow I have the impression that not only has this discussion left the > ground a while ago, no, meanwhile someone has cut the tether as well. > > By all means, if that's what floats your boat, continue - but you'll excuse > if meanwhile I'm a little bit pragmatic and trace some aerial imagery. I'm > sure it is wrong somehow, but I like the outcome.
I am having this conversation because I contribute to OSM on the basis that the database will be licensed CC BY-SA and will not be filled with data which conflicts with that license. If tracings from Bing imagery cannot be distributed under this license, then the OSM community should be made aware of this, so we can treat such edits as vandalism. If tracings from Bing can be distributed under a CC BY-SA license then again the OSM community should be made aware of this so we can use this as a mapping source. If the folks at Microsoft really do have the permissions to and grant us the permissions to license derived works as we wish, (even under the condition that they are uploaded to osm.org), they would come on this list and tell us directly whether we have the permission or not. As I mentioned before if this is not sorted out, conflicts will arise where two contributors are both working on the same feature, one believes we have the legal right and community norm to use Bing imagery to trace that feature, and another will think we don't have the right and want to create the same feature from their GPS survey. We cannot just divide and say trace if you want and don't if you don't think its okay. We need to find a norm as a community so we don't have this conflict. On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 9:42 PM, Rob Myers <r...@robmyers.org> wrote: > On 20/12/10 10:00, David Groom wrote: >> >> Why are we having this conversation? Because every now and then someone >> makes a statement along the lines that "we have a licence which allows >> us to use Bing Imagery for tracing", and as far as I can see that is not >> backed up by any evidence. > > It is backed up by the evidence provided. > >> When anyone details their concerns about this, the only answers that are >> ever given is "we have permission to do it", > > They are pointed to the relevant documents. And an explanation of the > combined results of those documents is offered. > > Which indicate that "we have permission to do it" for the reasons that have > previously been given. Do we have any legal experts who have looked at this evidence? What is their opinion? _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
