Re: [OSM-legal-talk] license change effect on un-tagged nodes

[ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen]

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: John Smith [mailto:deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com] 
Verzonden: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 9:17 PM
Aan: Licensing and other legal discussions.
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] license change effect on un-tagged nodes

On 6 July 2011 02:49, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen
<g.grem...@cetest.nl> wrote:
> I doubt if any effort in re-creating a map database of the real world
> can be classified as creative work,
> as the mapper inevitably tries to copy reality to the best of his
> effort, and any deviation is just imperfection
> and corrected once the right information is available.

We aren't for the most part trying to make raster images of aerial
imagery, so there is a lot of creativity that goes into making
interpretations of the real world.

[<GG>] Involuntary creativity then !

> I never met a OSM mapper saying he is using his creativity to create
> an original view of the world. Its not just a lack in precision and
> perfection that
> makes a work creative, the creator must also have the intention to add
> something
> of himself.

In terms of copyright this doesn't matter, just like if you write a
few lines of whatever, you automatically receive copyright on your
work.

[<GG>] I was not talking about copyright. Copyright laws are of no use
in the digital era,
their application is too large and too wide, and information can be
copied without loss.
The application of copyright law is expensive and full of pitfalls.
See what happens with movies and mp3 on P2P networks.
These are outdated legal texts, and have to be redefined.

> In creating tiles "the map" I agree. Not in creating a database.

In terms of copyright, it doesn't matter how a map is stored or how it
is displayed, it's the act of making it that matters and because there
is human involvement that's all that matters.

[<GG>] Is that true ???  

I would reformulate that as follows:

"In terms of copyright, it doesn't matter how a map is stored or how it
is displayed, it's the act of human coordinated creativity that
matters."

Not the mere fact that there are humans involved makes it copyrighted.


I think you agree with me that software is copyrighted due to the
algorithms implemented,  a proof of effort and creativity.
It's not the output of the software that is copyrighted by the writer
of the software, but the source code. The output can be copyrighted,
if created by copyrighted input.

OSM is the same. We have a set of algorithms and 200K+ human CPUs that
as
execute the algorithm defined by the community. Nothing creative there
but the algorithms. Its not the output that is copyrightable.
The input is the real world, be it by sometimes using media (bing) 
that are copyrighted as a picture, not the information it is providing.
Just like art photography , you cannot copyright Marilyn Monroe on a 
picture, but it's the composition, exposure time, color balance, moment
the picture was taken etc. BUT NOT THE PROPERTIES OF THE SUBJECT.

You may conclude she is blond and has big tits without infringement
of copyright. 

That is what we do with BING images.

Gert

 


_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk