On 11 July 2011 11:30, Andrew Harvey <andrew.harv...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 8:10 PM, Grant Slater > <openstreet...@firefishy.com> wrote: >> >> The traced data is a new work and therefore untainted by the Bing >> license. (NearMap doesn't see using aerial imagery this way.) >> The license is also a specific terms of use grant to OSM with the >> condition the derived data is uploaded to OSM. > > I can see that the assumption of "tracing aerial photography to create > a vector representation of the data is creating an entirely new work" > is potentially problematic. I'm not a lawyer, but I would think that > you would want the copyright holder to state that they disclaim any > copyright on such traced data just to be sure. Just take a look at > this case as an example > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_%22Hope%22_poster#Origin_and_copyright_issues >
Richard Fairhurst wrote a good piece on the legals around aerial imagery in 2009.... "Aerial photography, cock fighting and vodka bottles" - http://www.systemed.net/blog/legacy/100.html / Grant _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
