Hi everyone! I think it's safe to say that this thread has wandered way off topic. Please keep messages constructive and on-topic.
A great place to discuss the license and implications of others' use of OSM data are the couple legal mailing lists. Thanks, and happy new year! -Ian, your friendly list moderator On Dec 30, 2016 18:38, "Bill Ricker" <bill.n1...@gmail.com> wrote: On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Simon Poole <si...@poole.ch> wrote: > The ODbL is very clear on what "Publicly" is: > > “Publicly” – means to Persons other than You or under Your control by > either more than 50% ownership or by the power to direct their > activities (such as contracting with an independent consultant). > No need to speculate on that point. > Plenty of edge cases remain ... e.g. if a personal work for only family, is it "public"? I don't own my mother or adult child 50%+ ... and my ability to direct their activities has proven limited. > On the other hand, if they were using OSM data to trigger to spawning in a > specific locations it would still be rather open if that is actually a use > that is substantial. If it's a critical function of the derived work, it's at least arguably "substantial". PoGo without Pokemon spawning would be no fun at all. > Up to now I haven't seen any evidence that couldn't be explained in > numerous other ways that they are really using OSM data. Agreed. Hence "Hypothetical" and other hedge words. I joined this tread to discuss whether a Trap Close would be detectable, to see if the question is answerable. (Is the Poke-rookery named for the feature it is based upon?) Since the # edits with Pokemon in the comment has dropped off sharply, people aren't being rewarded for doing it; so (at least) one of the following is true - (a) word has gotten out not to put Pokemon in the comment as we'll revert bogus updates easier that way; (b) the game has already been fixed to prevent cheating * (which may mean delayed data hypothesis is intentionally true ) (c) video's theory isn't true at all (the announcement was either hoax or jumping to conclusions based on coincidence) (d) delayed data hypothesis is approximately true *but not* by Niantic's direct intent * co-causal: changes to reality induces convergent data changes. Maybe Google base maps get _some_ approved changes from _their_ (so-called) "community" eventually, but not coincident with ours (E.g., they got Sarah Long bridge closure before OSM since it was routing-urgent (i marked it impassable when it became routing urgent to me!), but we'll often get those footpaths and local pocket parks first since we our "approval process" is Admiral Grace M Hopper Approved.) * indirect pipeline: or someone (internally or externally to Google) is filtering our subsets of our changesets into GM/GE inputs and relying upon (a) not "substantial" use &/or (b) not being noticed &/or (c) not caring I think you and I are in general agreement that there is so far little to no evidence that anything much is happening, so we're just quibbling over hypothetical potential severity if it were (which would of course depend on exact particulars and require lawyers) and wondering aloud how/whether we could ever notice or prove it if so. Without specific evidence, on the Interwebs, the Bayesian Prior (default conclusion) should always be high confidence that (c) "Someone is Wrong on the Internet" [1] and low confidence otherwise; with that as a Prior, the low&early peak and rapidly decreasing popularity of "Pokemon" change-set comments in last week increases the other alternatives somewhat (and the powerset elements likewise as they are NOT fully mutually exclusive) but doesn't actually degrade (c)'s likelihood much. I [1] http://m.xkcd.com/386/ -- Bill Ricker bill.n1...@gmail.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/n1vux _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us