Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Database right for public transport
Hi, I am sorry, you are right, based on what I said, this conversation hardly concerns osm directly. I asked before I did not know where to start getting real help about this. And so, thank you for your answer. It finally got into the heart of the subject. I never thought of that point, that transport companies do not collect the timetable database, as it is already there. And this was, in fact, almost my argument in what I said, except that I did not realize the full extent of the separation between the creation and the gathering of the timetables. And you are right too, in the fact that timetables are close to be obvious copyrightable things, in that they are original creations of the mind, that really needed thinking, and time. About the distinction between sui generis and copyright, I jumped some times between the two groups of articles you cite here, I just did not understand until now that "sui generis" was exactly what I called "database copyright", as opposed to "droits d'auteur", for what you call - and actually is -"database copyright". In other words, I knew the distinction but did not know how to say it in english. What is weird, though, is that really every lawyer I asked in France, confirmed me there would not be any copyright on a single timetable, and the same for the collection of different timetables. They were always afraid of the interpretation of the database law, precisely because there had been no cases about it yet. And about the formal instruction, the point is I am a student, and I don't know if with the 500€ a year max I could spend on such unpredicted stuff, I would be sure to get my final advice...And when I asked today to one of the lawyers I called, he told me that on such a complex case, it would very probably cost me a lot...I really do not know where I will be able to find out all this money for that...and when I asked other cabinets, without even forwarding me to any lawyer they told me straight that this would be really expensive...I am no business man, unfortunately! Especially if I wanted, like at the beginning, to open this site I wanted to create, to as much countries as possible...this is just impossible to do without a huge proper funding...and still, it will be no use to osm and transiki because, even with all the advice that could be gathered, on the ways to bypass what can be bypassed, as you said it would probably be still too risky to use anything without proper authorization... Maybe then I will just turn to Transiki, and think of a way to get all these damn authorizations fast...We may still have a point in the fact that travel agencies in France always have this dichotomy between their internal database, and you recreating it with one-by-one timetables...Upon what you said, they still have to authorize it (which, in my experience, they all even do not know), but they will be much eager to do so, based on everything I heard. So developping a tool to assist timetable data transfer from pdf files to the transiki database, would still be a good thing I could start thinking of... Anyway, thank you for this very clever answer, it made me advance in this. Good night Andrei 2010/12/6 Francis Davey > On 6 December 2010 20:57, Andrei Klochko > wrote: > > Hello, > > [snip] > > > strategy, to avoid trouble. Any advice on such an entreprise? > > I'm not sure that this is really on topic for this list since it > doesn't impact legally on open street map (or it shouldn't). Its also > the kind of thing you should talk to a lawyer, preferably a French > lawyer, about rather than asking for advice on list, since you may get > more reliable advice that way. Also - this is true in this country but > may not be true in France - lawyers prefer to be formally instructed > when giving advice of this specificity in case the advice is acted > upon and then the person they advised gets into difficulty. The formal > instructions are a form of protection for the lawyer. > > Having said that you might want to think carefully about the > difference between database copyright (in L112-3 of the intellectual > property code) and the sui generis database right (in L341-1). > > There's a reasonable argument, based on the Fixtures Marketing cases > (see http://curia.europa.eu/fr/actu/communiques/cp04/aff/cp040089fr.pdf) > that a transport company does not acquire a database right in its own > timetable data because it does not expend resources "collecting" it > (in French the word is "la constitution" rather than "collection"). It > makes the timetable itself so does not need to collect it. As the > creator it has no database right (an odd but important result). I > think that is the thrust of your argument. > > But, a transport company might be able to claim a database copyright > in its timetable on the basis that it is an "intellectual creation". > The idea of the database directive was that a common standard would be > applied across all EU states for the threshold test for database >
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Database right for public transport
On 6 December 2010 20:57, Andrei Klochko wrote: > Hello, [snip] > strategy, to avoid trouble. Any advice on such an entreprise? I'm not sure that this is really on topic for this list since it doesn't impact legally on open street map (or it shouldn't). Its also the kind of thing you should talk to a lawyer, preferably a French lawyer, about rather than asking for advice on list, since you may get more reliable advice that way. Also - this is true in this country but may not be true in France - lawyers prefer to be formally instructed when giving advice of this specificity in case the advice is acted upon and then the person they advised gets into difficulty. The formal instructions are a form of protection for the lawyer. Having said that you might want to think carefully about the difference between database copyright (in L112-3 of the intellectual property code) and the sui generis database right (in L341-1). There's a reasonable argument, based on the Fixtures Marketing cases (see http://curia.europa.eu/fr/actu/communiques/cp04/aff/cp040089fr.pdf) that a transport company does not acquire a database right in its own timetable data because it does not expend resources "collecting" it (in French the word is "la constitution" rather than "collection"). It makes the timetable itself so does not need to collect it. As the creator it has no database right (an odd but important result). I think that is the thrust of your argument. But, a transport company might be able to claim a database copyright in its timetable on the basis that it is an "intellectual creation". The idea of the database directive was that a common standard would be applied across all EU states for the threshold test for database copyright. My impression is that the threshold for database copyright is lower in France than it is for most other forms of copyright, but that is still somewhat uncertain I think. The reason this may be a real issue is that it does require intellectual creativity to put together most transport timetables. Considerable thought needs to go in to ensuring that they work. On the basis of a recent High Court case in which the football league's fixtures list was accepted as an intellectual creation, I am fairly sure that such timetables are copyrightable as databases in England. The standard _ought_ to be the same in France, but there has been no direct court of justice authority on the point as far as I know. In other words: I don't think it would work. -- Francis Davey ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
[OSM-legal-talk] Database right for public transport
Hello, first, to put things clear, I know of Transiki, I know of Google Transit obviously, I know of OSMand, and I know - a little - about database copyright in France. I already asked several lawyers about my questions, without it resulting in any clear answer. And no, what I intend to do will not be linked to OSM, I will create a separate dite on which OSM would only feature as the provider of purely geographical data. And also, this site I may make myself will not prevent me, on another end, to contribute to the more proper Transiki. But still, I have this "dirty" idea, that I would like to try. My question is not about trying to naively copy everything, it is more about trying to find a way so that I more recreate than copy things. My question is this: Starting which point, the whole set of timetables of a single, standalone transit agency, would constitute a protectable database according to French Law, in the way that it needed "substantial efforts, either materialy, financially or in terms of personel, to be created"? By "created", I also intend that the only work directly tight to the creation of a database, is the gathering of information, not its creation (i will come back to that point later on). On another end, I know transit agencies are hardly on their own in the real world, but the thinking behind this is that, if, and only if, I can copy or reproduce, in any way, including taking pictures of bus stops, the whole set of timetables a *small* transit agency, then wether these timetables were gathered *afterwards*(after their creation by the small transit agency, and put onto their small site) into a bigger database, by either the big company owning the small one, or by the public authority compiling timetables of all the transit agencies of whom it has the charge, is none of my concern: in this case, we would only be gathering data *from the same source*. Of course, if it happens that the transit agencies only propose unfinished timetables either to the public authority or to their parent company, and that it is the authority/parent company that finishes all timetables of many small agencies, then these timetables would directly be part of their personal database, and then, taking these timetables, by any mean, would probably be copying their database. The point behind that is that there may be a way, along which it would not be easy for transport agencies to ever prove that a site indeed made unauthorized copy of a *protected *database. If a set of 10 timetables is possible to copy, then when you copy timetables from a single transit agency site, you would only copy THEIR small database, and if the investment they made into gathering timetable information - I insist on the term *gathering, *not *creating* - then the copy of all their timetables would not be forbidden; and if one would copy like that all timetables from all the small transit agencies he can, and if by doing this he recreates the timetable database of some big transport authority or parent company, then who cares, as he only recreated the database from the same source as did this big entity. This could maybe be a way to do a quick-and-dirty transit map, and see if anyone manages to prove that there was something illegal in it. I know this kind of project may sound quite risky, which is why I will do everything possible to cut all responsibility off Openstreetmap, which I think is not difficult as Openstreetmap staff would have nothing to do with my future standalone site, and also, I am not going into that without preparing the terrain, which is why I am right now consulting so many lawyers to get a better picture of what is ahead me, and readying my strategy, to avoid trouble. Any advice on such an entreprise? Thanks Andrei ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 6:58 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > > pec...@gmail.com wrote: > >> License is fine. It is CT which in fact still allows OSMF to change >> data license to any other "free license" (which could be strip "share >> alike" and "attribution" requirements) what blocks usage. In fact, >> there is NO license which allows such CT to coexist. Only PD, and >> that's even not working in all countries. >> > > I'm sure that if, at any time in the future, the OSM license needs to be > changed, it will be into something that works in all countries. > > We don't know if it will ever be necessary; we don't know what that license > might be; we don't even know which countries will be around then and what > their legal systems will look like. Think long-term! This is not a clause > aimed at next year. > > > I know that ODbL team talked about changing description of "free >> license", but I don't see any official statements about that. I'm >> afraid that PDists got their way all over again. >> > > ODbL is not a PD license, so you do not have to be afraid. As for the > distant future - we don't know who will be in OSM then, what their > preferences will be, and wheter you and I will be alive then. I think it is > ok to let those who *then* run OSM decide, instead of trying to force onto > them what we today think is right. > I think the problem with this idea is that it opens the door for carpetbaggers[1]. The purpose of share-alike licenses is to prevent the freeness of people's contributions from *ever* being hijacked. I, for one, certainly want to ensure that whoever runs OSM at some indeterminate point in the future can not pervert the principle on which I made my contributions. Anything less is unacceptable and is disrespectful to those who built OSM in the first place. 80n [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpetbagger#United_Kingdom > > And legal-talk is that way ---> > > Bye > Frederik > > -- > Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" > > ___ > 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
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Someone already had a look at the Bing Terms of Use?
On 12/06/2010 10:18 AM, Andrew Harvey wrote: I suppose I don't mind if a license is technically invalid because of some obscure legal reason, I just think that the intent needs to be there, publicly, officially, and clearly stated on what they are okay with and what they aren't. I don't think the Bing people have clearly stated what they consider acceptable and what they don't. You can use the Bing map tiles in OSM editors and contribute the results to OSM: "Microsoft is pleased to announce the royalty-free use of the Bing Maps Imagery Editor API, allowing the Open Street Map community to use Bing Maps imagery via the API as a backdrop to your OSM map editors." Another potential problem I see with Bing is, as far as I could tell, this grant is only for OpenStreetMap. Does their permission extend to other people who then use the OSM database? I feel this needs to be made clear. Once it's in the OSM DB, it's under OSM's control thanks to the CTs, so there are no downstream issues caused by the data coming from Bing. - Rob. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Someone already had a look at the Bing Terms of Use?
Andrew, Manuel - On 12/06/2010 10:28 AM, Andrew Harvey wrote: I feel that it is not safe at this point. I have raised my concerns in this thread http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2010-December/005299.html The situation is sufficient for me to use Bing imagery for tracing. I'm not looking at the legal side of it, I'm just looking at the size of the PR disaster should Microsoft attempt to backtrack in any way. PR is more important than legal. As most people on this list know, with CC-BY-SA being next to invalid for Geodata in the US, any of the big US players could long have taken our data an run. Why haven't they? Because they fear a PR disaster. But luckily this is something that everyone can decide for themselves - if you're happy with the situation, start tracing; if you're not, then don't. There's enough mapping to be done without reliance to Bing images. Bye Frederik ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Someone already had a look at the Bing Terms of Use?
I feel that it is not safe at this point. I have raised my concerns in this thread http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2010-December/005299.html On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 9:16 PM, Manuel Reimer wrote: > Hello, > > is it secure to use Bing? Any license risks? Could Microsoft, at some day, > just force us to remove everything with "source=Bing" on it? Am I forced to > have this "source" tag there? Should stuff, taken from Bing, be verified via > GPS track at some time to get the data secure? > > One risk, which definetly exists, is that Microsoft rejects their offer at > some time, so if there is no risk in using the data, I would start to use it > to complete several things in my area (buildings, landuse, ) as long as > the data is still available for OSM. > > Yours > > Manuel > > > ___ > 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
