At the risk of being that guy that questions everything: On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:09 AM, Ian Sergeant <inas66+...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Ok, for the sake of argument, how would provider A demonstrate that >> OSM's data was made by copying its "compilation of facts", when >> providers B and C contain exactly the same facts? > > > I think that question equates to, how would you get caught? Well, firstly,
Well, no. In most (all?) instances of copyright infringement, there's really no doubt that copying has taken place. If you release an MP3, and I have that MP3 on my computer, then by some channel I have copied it from you to me. But if you have a list of street names in my suburb, and I have a list of street names in my suburb, it's really not possible to say that one of us copied the other. (And in reality, it will be much less clear, because both of us will also have street names that the other doesn't, plus all sorts of other differences.) >> Certainly - but breaching terms of service is not copyright infringement. > > The outcome after a successful case is much the same. Ok, IANAL, but I would have thought (could well be wrong) that the remedy for breaching terms of service is basically being blocked from using the service. To sue, they'd need to demonstrate some damages - a bit different from copyright infringement. >> I also have to say, there's a big grey area between "copying street >> names to build a database" and "looking up street names out of >> curiosity, while also building a database". > > No there isn't. Imagine you are on a jury, and you have a defendant witness > saying "I didn't copy street names, I just looked them up out of curiosity > while I was also building a competing map product". And then the defence lawyer starts asking, "So why do you contribute to OSM? Are you curious about maps? Describe your interest in maps..." etc. At that point the jury realises we're all weirdos and gives up. > That's why "Just Don't Do It", works best. Yep - I'm in complete agreement that vigorously chanting "don't copy data" is the correct strategy. >Because B and C would not contain the same facts. Every map source has unique >errors, some of which are put there on purpose. Streets that don't exist, >names spelt wrong, with the wrong road type, >etc. It's not hard to show where >data comes from, if you copy a lot of it. Hence the value of cross-checking between multiple sources. Btw - does this "deliberate errors" thing still take place, or is it something of an urban myth? >The third street I ever mapped, just down the road from my house at the time, >has slightly different names on the road signs, the local street atlas, and >google maps. I have no idea which of the three is >officially correct, but OSM has what's on the signs. Yep, it's a simple rule to apply. Would you do that if there was agreement amongst every source except the physical sign? Steve _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
