[talk-ph] CloudMade Services Are Now Free
In case anyone here is interested to create revenues out of OSM data and clodmade services: http://blog.cloudmade.com/2010/05/16/cloudmade-services-are-now-free-%e2%80%93-sign-up-today/ The original post is inaccessible at the moment. Copy pasted the content here: CloudMade Services Are Now Free – Sign Up Today If you are a mobile or web developer – we have good news! As of today, when you sign up for a CloudMade developer account all of our services will be free of charge and will let you make money with location based advertising (LBA). CloudMade’s services include: * Style Editor – customize your maps * Forward and Reverse Geocoding & Local Search * iPhone SDK and Mobile SDKs * Static Maps * Routing – vehicle, pedestrian and cycle navigation * Web Maps Studio * Data Market Place (some sets are now free) * Navi Studio – add fully featured turn-by-turn navigation apps Right after you sign up for a CloudMade developer account, you’ll also get LBA with revenue share and instant access to our 10,500-strong developer community to help you get started. To find out more about our mobile services and to sign up, click here. More about our web services can be found here. Already have an ad partner or want an SLA? Get CloudMade Select If you already have an ad partner and don’t want CloudMade ads in your app or you need an SLA then CloudMade Select is for you. By signing up to this plan developers get a whole host of additional benefits including: guaranteed response times for support; guaranteed SLA; HTTP services access; HTTPs/SSL (coming soon); support for intranet apps and no user limits. New Support Site Now Available We’ve also just launched a new support site that contains FAQs, Forums and Issue Trackers – everything you need to build awesome apps. -- cheers, maning -- "Freedom is still the most radical idea of all" -N.Branden wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/ blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ -- ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] Bacolod is still a big problem
On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 6:58 PM, Ray wrote: > On the other hand pls. be aware that not everybody want's to upload this > gps tracks due to privacy concerns or some body could find out about > one's nice and quiet camping place. I do respect if people are concerned with privacy issues regarding GPS tracks. In my case, I simply delete trackpoints for areas I don't want shared to OSM. However, I am finding more good uses with publicly available traces other than tracing roads or proving authenticity of edits. http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/2010/01/21/eastern-bulacan-pampanga-and-nueva-ecija-imagery-update-in-openstreetmap/ -- cheers, maning -- "Freedom is still the most radical idea of all" -N.Branden wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/ blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ -- ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] Bacolod is still a big problem
Many people already argued that copying from aerial imagery is not governed by copyright law. Case law proved it: http://www.systemed.net/blog/?p=100 However, Google terms of use explicitly do not allow this: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/2009/03/17/google-mapmaker-and-openstreetmap/ That said, I echo Eugene's statement. Do not test this slippery and complicated legal argument in OSM. We maybe impatient with the progress of OSM in many areas in the country. But in due time, we can get it done the OSM way. -- cheers, maning -- "Freedom is still the most radical idea of all" -N.Branden wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/ blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ -- ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] Bacolod is still a big problem
Hi, everyone. Thank you for your comments. I do appreciate them all, and I respect you all for giving them freely. I will, of course, follow OSM guidelines to the letter, and will in no way jeopardize all of the hard work that has been done before my very recent arrival. I am, like many, simply frustrated at how copyright is used at a weapon and how it does, in fact, stifle creativity and advancements in many areas. You are all aware of this, of course. Best to you all, Craig. On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 5:11 AM, Totor wrote: > Hi Craig, > > I saw this question several times here and there and can not agree > completely. > > I think that Facts/Locations can not be copyrighted indeed, but maps can. > > It takes quite a lot of work to represent the locations of items accurately > on maps. > It's much easier to copy from an existing map. (Why would some OSM mappers > be tempted if this was not the case?) So it seems reasonable to me to > protect this work by a copyright. > When you copy from a map, even small portions, you don't copy facts, but a > more or less faithful representation someone else made. > > If you copy Google maps, you even copying "someone's imagination" ! > Here Google has several non existing roads on the map : > > http://sautter.com/map/?zoom=17&lat=10.3468&lon=123.91864&layers=B0TF > Even comparing just the location should not be done, since the map seems > offset... > > The above is also true for the satellite images (although maybe less > obviously). Several years ago, I saw a duplicate parallel road on the border > of stitched images (Each of them ending in a blurry house on opposite sides > at some distance). I was unable to find it now, but I'm sure you'll be able > to find some artifacts if you look for them. > > Cheers, > > Totor > > > > > --- On *Sun, 5/16/10, Craig * wrote: > > > From: Craig > Subject: Re: [talk-ph] Bacolod is still a big problem > To: "Andre Marcelo-Tanner" > Cc: talk-ph@openstreetmap.org > Date: Sunday, May 16, 2010, 4:09 AM > > Maybe there is something fundamental that I don't get, but, let me ask a > question, please. How is it possible that a location of a road or building > or anything can be copyrighted? I understand not copying entire maps, etc., > from a source and then claiming it as your own is contrary to copyright, but > "facts", and a road location is a fact, not something created from someone's > imagination. > [...] > > > > ___ > talk-ph mailing list > talk-ph@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph > > ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
[talk-ph] 1st Anniversary of the Tagaytay Mapping Party!
I almost forgot, today (or rather yesterday since it's already midnight) was the 1st anniversary of the first ever mapping party in the Philippines! :-) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagaytay_Mapping_Party Sali na sa Ortigas-Mandaluyong Mapping Party. :-) ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] Bacolod is still a big problem
Hi Craig, I saw this question several times here and there and can not agree completely. I think that Facts/Locations can not be copyrighted indeed, but maps can. It takes quite a lot of work to represent the locations of items accurately on maps. It's much easier to copy from an existing map. (Why would some OSM mappers be tempted if this was not the case?) So it seems reasonable to me to protect this work by a copyright. When you copy from a map, even small portions, you don't copy facts, but a more or less faithful representation someone else made. If you copy Google maps, you even copying "someone's imagination" ! Here Google has several non existing roads on the map : http://sautter.com/map/?zoom=17&lat=10.3468&lon=123.91864&layers=B0TF Even comparing just the location should not be done, since the map seems offset... The above is also true for the satellite images (although maybe less obviously). Several years ago, I saw a duplicate parallel road on the border of stitched images (Each of them ending in a blurry house on opposite sides at some distance). I was unable to find it now, but I'm sure you'll be able to find some artifacts if you look for them. Cheers, Totor --- On Sun, 5/16/10, Craig wrote: From: Craig Subject: Re: [talk-ph] Bacolod is still a big problem To: "Andre Marcelo-Tanner" Cc: talk-ph@openstreetmap.org Date: Sunday, May 16, 2010, 4:09 AM Maybe there is something fundamental that I don't get, but, let me ask a question, please. How is it possible that a location of a road or building or anything can be copyrighted? I understand not copying entire maps, etc., from a source and then claiming it as your own is contrary to copyright, but "facts", and a road location is a fact, not something created from someone's imagination. [...] ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] Bacolod is still a big problem
Hi, this topic is discussed every now and then. Facts are free, but you can't use the help of copyright protected material. If you only copy one house/street/whatever maybe that doesn't matter. But what if all of us are doing this? You end up with a 100% copy of the map and than even you will agree, that this is a no go. So where to drew the line? It's impossible and that's why the community agrees not to use copyright protected maps even for a poi to copy. What you can to with this maps is comparing for areas which need attention, go there and do your mappings. Or use openstreetbugs to report them, so others can pick up. OSM license allows anyone to use our data for any purpose and without the need to give anything back, even sell it and make money out of your/our work. They only have to mention the license. That's the open part in OSM. But you can't expect to do everyone like this and we respect this. Take a look at the OSM history, e.g. http://www.geofabrik.de/en/gallery/history/index.html It's amazing what has been done only with free sources or donated date in this short periode of time. We should be proud of it and keep the OSM free from data of copyright protected sources. If there are white spaces, give it some time and somebody will do traces and close them. We need more mappers. Also note, that google and others can't give away what they don't have. The images on goolge maps/earth are bought from other companys which own the copyright - you can see the company's name on the map. Maybe this will change if they are using the images from their own satellite. AFAIK they wanted to wait with updating gmaps when they have images from the whole world. IMHO they should have them already - we'll see. There is even an difference in the yahoo images free to copy and the ones on the yahoo webpage which are not free to copy. See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Yahoo!_Aerial_Imagery On the other hand pls. be aware that not everybody want's to upload this gps tracks due to privacy concerns or some body could find out about one's nice and quiet camping place. Questions about anonymizing gps data arise on the user mailing list form time to time. But in this case ppl. should respond different to questions about the source. Greetings Ray Craig wrote: > Maybe there is something fundamental that I don't get, but, let me ask a > question, please. How is it possible that a location of a road or building > or anything can be copyrighted? I understand not copying entire maps, etc., > from a source and then claiming it as your own is contrary to copyright, but > "facts", and a road location is a fact, not something created from someone's > imagination. > > Google itself allows businesses to use tools to correct the location of that > business if it is in error on Google's maps. Nobody is copying and > distributing Google satellite images, nor are they distributing other Google > properties. > > I think this worry about copyright violations is a knee-jerk reaction and > would not stand up in a court of law. Big companies with big law firms > backing them up is very intimidating, but that doesn't change the fact that > you should be able to refer to a Google map or image to confirm a road > location or other geographical entity. I see this as fair use. > > Also, thousands of people around the world have contributed to mapping for > Google through efforts around the Haiti and Chile earthquakes. I'd say > copyright is a bit dicey in that situation because Google only facilitated > the mapping. Also, thousands upon thousands of buildings have been placed in > Google Earth, thanks only to users like us. Myself, I have contributed > mapping and 3D buildings. > > Is OSM open to the world? If it is, then Google can use OSM data. If Google > sued OSM for improving maps using "Google's data" only to integrate that > into their own products, that would be major hypocrisy. > > I'm sick of corporations creating this atmosphere of "we're going to sue > your asses off" at the drop of a hat. It's a sad thing, and well-minded > people like those contributing to a better world via OSM and other similar > projects should not have the spectre of litigation hanging over their heads. ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] Micro Mapping Party in Ortigas-Mandaluyong on May 22
This sounds good. And thanks for keeping my request in mind, Eugene! Unfortunately, I will be out of the country on the weekend of the 22nd. Please let me know if we can. Resched to another date - weekday, perhaps or on another weekend. I've yet to figure out how to upload the correct data to OSM. On May 15, 2010, at 10:22 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: Hi guys, I really don't think we could push through with the Corregidor Mapping Party. Planning was mostly nonexistent and I don't think many people are willing to spend a large amount of money for the ferry trip and the possible overnight stay in the hotel on Corregidor. Let's postpone that island for a while. In the meantime, I suggest we tackle parts of Metro Manila that are still incomplete: 1. Mandaluyong-Shaw area: http://sautter.com/map/?zoom=17&lat=14.58246&lon=121.04721&layers=B0TF This area of Mandaluyong is still missing a lot of streets because they are covered by clouds in the Yahoo satellite imagery. 2. Ortigas CBD: http://sautter.com/map/?zoom=17&lat=14.58448&lon=121.05964&layers=B0TF In contrast to the Makati CBD, Ortigas is still pretty blank in its building coverage. 3. Metrowalk-Ortigas Home Depot: http://sautter.com/map/?zoom=17&lat=14.58647&lon=121.06578&layers=B0TF Yahoo's satellite imagery in this area predates the large retail construction here so it would be nice if we can map this new development. One nice thing about this is that these three areas are near each other and since this is Ortigas, meeting up would be easier. And after the on-the-field surveying, let's meet up after and have that newbies tutorial session that Carlos suggested. What do you guys think? :-) Eugene ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
