Robert Whittaker (OSM Talk GB) >Sent: 11 May 2010 11:43 PM >To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org >Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Definitive Paths Map Source > >On 11 May 2010 21:30, martyn <i...@dynoyo.plus.com> wrote: >> In Hertfordshire, East Herts publish maps that are drawn on top of an OS >> layer. But for each parish, they also publish a text description of >> each numbered right of way, last updated in 2006. Useful as not all >> real-world physical signs have the number. So using that with the NPE >> layer in Potlatch it should be possible to check and reconstruct the >> present ROWs. >> >> Anyone see any problems with this method? > >If the textural descriptions (known as the "Definitive Statement") >have been written in part by someone looking at the maps (rather than >just looking at the ground) then there is argument that they too are a >derivative work of the OS maps, and hence contain IP rights belonging >to OS.
Having read quite a few of these I've yet to see any real evidence that the statement has been prepared from a map. Each time I've looked that them to me the read the other way around, that someone has translated the statement onto the map. The reason I say this is because sometimes the maps miss some of the subtle detail described in the statement. Bearing in mind that the statements form part of the legal paper chase between the LA and the landowner and lawyers always tend to work with words, I'm confident that statements dont include OS data. I also consider statements fair game, and have added all the footpath referencing for my local area by reference to them, though for the route on the ground I only trust the GPS and the physical way marked or trodden route. > >I don't know exactly what copyright protects, so wouldn't like to >comment on whether or not the argument is valid. But without expert >legal advice, I don't think it's a risk OSM should take. > >On the bright side though, I thought part of the result of the OS >consultation was that they would look to clarify the rules on derived >data. In particular, this may help with respect to PRoW data. > >Another avenue in the mean time would be to get copies of the >definitive map and statement as they were 50 years ago (for which >crown copyright will have expired), and also a list of paths that have >been modified since (modification orders are hard to get, so there may >not be that many). We can then get definitive information on most of >the current public rights of way. My local library has the definitive statements in the one book, with subsequent versions over the ages added into the binding. So as you say its easy to compare what the statement says 50+ years ago and the changes that have occurred periodically with time. Updates in my area seem to be about every 20 years or so. Cheers Andy > >-- >Robert Whittaker > >_______________________________________________ >Talk-GB mailing list >Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org >http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2868 - Release Date: 05/11/10 >19:40:00 _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
