Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Which legislation applies: server or data location?
Interesting logic. Can we be sure about it? In fact, some mappers have argued that, even though they traced over Google's imagery, street names and POIs were surveyed (because Google's are often misplaced, misspelled, missing or just plain wrong), and this is precisely the information we currently lack the most. Another one is turn restrictions, which I believe follows the same logic. Even better, much of that data could be incorporated quite quickly using the conflation plug-in for JOSM, perhaps even the turn restrictions. Maybe the only problem is that their data does not tell us when this was not the case (no "source" tags or "changeset" comments or whatnot). But, in a way, it also doesn't tell anyone else. Legal accusations would be based on written communications found on Internet forums, and I'm not sure whether this would be enough. On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 3:44 PM, Simon Poole wrote: > It would be interesting to know what kind of information is contained in > TrackSource, I could imagine a potential way forward based on the ago > old adage (well it is a couple of seconds old :-)): > > geometry is cheap, meta expensive > > If there is meta data (street names, other similar information) present > in TrackSource that has actually been surveyed and not copied from > somewhere, this could potentially be used together with our usual > complement of addicted arm chair mappers tracing geometry from aerial > imagery (which man need to be acquired in one form or another). > > Simon > > > Am 28.08.2013 01:31, schrieb Fernando Trebien: >> Well, in this particular case, it is a bit complicated. Some of the >> data (though we can't tell which part of it) might have been traced >> over Google imagery, and Brazilian law might be more lenient as was >> the case of several US court cases >> (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Derivative_works#Maps). I >> fear that delving into subtle legal interpretations here doesn't help >> us anyway since it would be illegal in the UK to provide any data >> derived from Google's services, regardless of the location the data >> refers to. >> >> Brazil already has another "open" maps project called TrackSource >> (released under a CC-BY-SA license) and some people in that project >> have shown interest in contributing to OSM their own data, which was >> collected and refined over almost a decade. We know that we can't take >> the official "released" maps, but the contributors (which own their >> own data) are willing to upload their unlicensed data. That would be >> legal except for the fact that their community actively encouraged >> tracing using Google Earth (there are several records of that on the >> Internet). A considerable part of that data, however, was also mixed >> with personally collected tracklogs, some of it using very advanced >> survey techniques, but it is impossible to tell which data elements >> came from which source using their (rudimentary?) tools and database >> formats. In other words, they've never really worried about these >> licensing issues. >> >> Even though we are telling them to contribute only the data they are >> sure to be unrelated to Google, we're simply not sure if they are >> following our advice. Some have already started thinking of ways to >> automatically detect imports from TrackSource maps and report the >> changesets to OSMF for a mass reversal. Meanwhile I'm trying to >> prevent the TrackSource folks from losing interest in OSM. >> >> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Paul Norman wrote: >>>> From: Simon Poole [mailto:si...@poole.ch] >>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 1:24 AM >>>> Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Which legislation applies: server or data >>>> location? >>>> >>>> >>>> Ian has already given a good answer. So just a couple of further notes: >>> Some more notes, from a slightly different perspective >>> >>> - The UK has as strong or stronger IP protection for map data than other >>> countries, rendering the question moot most of the time. >>> >>> - As this question originated with an import, any such questions *should* be >>> raised in the import proposal. My guess is that the DWG would tell the user >>> to not import until they get clearance from the LWG. >>> >>> - What OSM does is flat out illegal in some places (North Korea being the >>> typical example, but not the only one). I don't think anyone is particularly >>> concerned, although contributors in such countrie
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Which legislation applies: server or data location?
It would be interesting to know what kind of information is contained in TrackSource, I could imagine a potential way forward based on the ago old adage (well it is a couple of seconds old :-)): geometry is cheap, meta expensive If there is meta data (street names, other similar information) present in TrackSource that has actually been surveyed and not copied from somewhere, this could potentially be used together with our usual complement of addicted arm chair mappers tracing geometry from aerial imagery (which man need to be acquired in one form or another). Simon Am 28.08.2013 01:31, schrieb Fernando Trebien: > Well, in this particular case, it is a bit complicated. Some of the > data (though we can't tell which part of it) might have been traced > over Google imagery, and Brazilian law might be more lenient as was > the case of several US court cases > (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Derivative_works#Maps). I > fear that delving into subtle legal interpretations here doesn't help > us anyway since it would be illegal in the UK to provide any data > derived from Google's services, regardless of the location the data > refers to. > > Brazil already has another "open" maps project called TrackSource > (released under a CC-BY-SA license) and some people in that project > have shown interest in contributing to OSM their own data, which was > collected and refined over almost a decade. We know that we can't take > the official "released" maps, but the contributors (which own their > own data) are willing to upload their unlicensed data. That would be > legal except for the fact that their community actively encouraged > tracing using Google Earth (there are several records of that on the > Internet). A considerable part of that data, however, was also mixed > with personally collected tracklogs, some of it using very advanced > survey techniques, but it is impossible to tell which data elements > came from which source using their (rudimentary?) tools and database > formats. In other words, they've never really worried about these > licensing issues. > > Even though we are telling them to contribute only the data they are > sure to be unrelated to Google, we're simply not sure if they are > following our advice. Some have already started thinking of ways to > automatically detect imports from TrackSource maps and report the > changesets to OSMF for a mass reversal. Meanwhile I'm trying to > prevent the TrackSource folks from losing interest in OSM. > > On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Paul Norman wrote: >>> From: Simon Poole [mailto:si...@poole.ch] >>> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 1:24 AM >>> Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Which legislation applies: server or data >>> location? >>> >>> >>> Ian has already given a good answer. So just a couple of further notes: >> Some more notes, from a slightly different perspective >> >> - The UK has as strong or stronger IP protection for map data than other >> countries, rendering the question moot most of the time. >> >> - As this question originated with an import, any such questions *should* be >> raised in the import proposal. My guess is that the DWG would tell the user >> to not import until they get clearance from the LWG. >> >> - What OSM does is flat out illegal in some places (North Korea being the >> typical example, but not the only one). I don't think anyone is particularly >> concerned, although contributors in such countries may be. Similarly, >> distributing non-official boundaries may be a problem, and it's impossible >> to satisfy countries on both sides of some boundaries at the same time. >> >> - When dealing with government data, the concerns have mainly been if it is >> legal in that country. Local governments near me will not license database >> rights because no such concept exists to them. >> >> I had more, but paused and forgot it. >> >> >> ___ >> 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] Which legislation applies: server or data location?
Well, in this particular case, it is a bit complicated. Some of the data (though we can't tell which part of it) might have been traced over Google imagery, and Brazilian law might be more lenient as was the case of several US court cases (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Derivative_works#Maps). I fear that delving into subtle legal interpretations here doesn't help us anyway since it would be illegal in the UK to provide any data derived from Google's services, regardless of the location the data refers to. Brazil already has another "open" maps project called TrackSource (released under a CC-BY-SA license) and some people in that project have shown interest in contributing to OSM their own data, which was collected and refined over almost a decade. We know that we can't take the official "released" maps, but the contributors (which own their own data) are willing to upload their unlicensed data. That would be legal except for the fact that their community actively encouraged tracing using Google Earth (there are several records of that on the Internet). A considerable part of that data, however, was also mixed with personally collected tracklogs, some of it using very advanced survey techniques, but it is impossible to tell which data elements came from which source using their (rudimentary?) tools and database formats. In other words, they've never really worried about these licensing issues. Even though we are telling them to contribute only the data they are sure to be unrelated to Google, we're simply not sure if they are following our advice. Some have already started thinking of ways to automatically detect imports from TrackSource maps and report the changesets to OSMF for a mass reversal. Meanwhile I'm trying to prevent the TrackSource folks from losing interest in OSM. On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Paul Norman wrote: >> From: Simon Poole [mailto:si...@poole.ch] >> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 1:24 AM >> Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Which legislation applies: server or data >> location? >> >> >> Ian has already given a good answer. So just a couple of further notes: > > Some more notes, from a slightly different perspective > > - The UK has as strong or stronger IP protection for map data than other > countries, rendering the question moot most of the time. > > - As this question originated with an import, any such questions *should* be > raised in the import proposal. My guess is that the DWG would tell the user > to not import until they get clearance from the LWG. > > - What OSM does is flat out illegal in some places (North Korea being the > typical example, but not the only one). I don't think anyone is particularly > concerned, although contributors in such countries may be. Similarly, > distributing non-official boundaries may be a problem, and it's impossible > to satisfy countries on both sides of some boundaries at the same time. > > - When dealing with government data, the concerns have mainly been if it is > legal in that country. Local governments near me will not license database > rights because no such concept exists to them. > > I had more, but paused and forgot it. > > > ___ > legal-talk mailing list > legal-talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk -- Fernando Trebien +55 (51) 9962-5409 "The speed of computer chips doubles every 18 months." (Moore's law) "The speed of software halves every 18 months." (Gates' law) ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Which legislation applies: server or data location?
> From: Simon Poole [mailto:si...@poole.ch] > Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 1:24 AM > Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Which legislation applies: server or data > location? > > > Ian has already given a good answer. So just a couple of further notes: Some more notes, from a slightly different perspective - The UK has as strong or stronger IP protection for map data than other countries, rendering the question moot most of the time. - As this question originated with an import, any such questions *should* be raised in the import proposal. My guess is that the DWG would tell the user to not import until they get clearance from the LWG. - What OSM does is flat out illegal in some places (North Korea being the typical example, but not the only one). I don't think anyone is particularly concerned, although contributors in such countries may be. Similarly, distributing non-official boundaries may be a problem, and it's impossible to satisfy countries on both sides of some boundaries at the same time. - When dealing with government data, the concerns have mainly been if it is legal in that country. Local governments near me will not license database rights because no such concept exists to them. I had more, but paused and forgot it. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Which legislation applies: server or data location?
Ian has already given a good answer. So just a couple of further notes: - we want our data to be useful and usable in as many countries as possible, there are some areas where that is very difficult to achieve, however this is in general not intellectual property law related - the history of the Internet is littered with failures that started off by thinking they could get around copyright law by going offshore - courts all over the world have found that services provided over the Internet which are in the least targeted towards the local populace fall under national jurisdiction (for example in the case of OSM anything we provide would clearly be considered as being provided locally in Germany, or France, just to give two examples). This also leads to the situation that a potential issue will probably end up in the courts of a country that has the most favourable environment for whoever has a bone to pick with us - while we are not directly responsible for the well being of third parties that build services and products based on OSM data, we need to take in to account that they may be directly affected by problematic data Simon Am 27.08.2013 04:04, schrieb Fernando Trebien: > Hello everyone, > > Amidst hard questions in the Brazilian community, I've been wondering > which copyright legislation should apply to OpenStreetMap's data (in > the case of suspicious data imports): that of where the data is stored > and provided from (seems to be from the UK right now) or that of where > the data refers to? Or both? Or some other international law? > ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Which legislation applies: server or data location?
On 27 August 2013 12:04, Fernando Trebien wrote: > Amidst hard questions in the Brazilian community, I've been wondering > which copyright legislation should apply to OpenStreetMap's data (in > the case of suspicious data imports): that of where the data is stored > and provided from (seems to be from the UK right now) or that of where > the data refers to? Or both? Or some other international law? OSM has to obey the laws in the country where it operates. Data shouldn't contributed to the server in the UK that would be in breach of UK law. Contributors should obey the laws of the jurisdictions in which they reside, or are otherwise obliged to obey. Local mapping communities should be able to reach a consensus about contributions that may (for legal reasons) reduce the utility of using the maps in that jurisdiction. This will always be a measured discussion, depending on the particular circumstances. My personal contribution to any such discussion would be that imports that are contrary to local laws that can be substituted legally by other data, survey or otherwise, should not be accepted. Ian. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
[OSM-legal-talk] Which legislation applies: server or data location?
Hello everyone, Amidst hard questions in the Brazilian community, I've been wondering which copyright legislation should apply to OpenStreetMap's data (in the case of suspicious data imports): that of where the data is stored and provided from (seems to be from the UK right now) or that of where the data refers to? Or both? Or some other international law? -- Fernando Trebien +55 (51) 9962-5409 "The speed of computer chips doubles every 18 months." (Moore's law) "The speed of software halves every 18 months." (Gates' law) ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
