On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 5:18 AM, Dan Karran <d...@karran.net> wrote: > 2009/9/10 David Muir Sharnoff <li...@dave.sharnoff.org>: > > Has anyone set a letter to Google's legal department asking for > > clarification or permission? > > I haven't asked their legal department, but Ed Parsons said in an > email yesterday (not sure if my post[1] about it got through to the > list?) that it's ok to check our facts, but anything more than that > (extracting/mass extracting of data) is not likely to be compliant > with their license agreement. As I see it, if their license agreement > prevents us doing it, then it's already ruled out, and it's not a > question of what copyright or database law says at that point. >
By "license agreement" you mean the ToS? A ToS violation, which is not a violation of copyright or database law, is between Google and the violator. As long as OSM says "don't do it", and doesn't encourage violations, it really doesn't matter to OSM if people listen or not. On the other hand, a copyright or database law violation is a major problem for OSM, because as they collect, the database starts getting tainted and becomes unusable. Another issue is that the ToS is governed by local law. If Google wants to sue me for violating the ToS, they need to do so in the US. If the issue is copyright law or database law, on the other hand, they can sue in any/every jurisdiction in which the data is copied. I'm comfortable making my own decisions as to what I should or shouldn't do with regard to US law which doesn't affect the project. I'm perfectly willing to argue in court that it's unconscionable for Google to restrict me from using a Google Street View image to check whether or not I'm aloud to make a left hand turn on a certain street. I'm willing to argue that the ToS is a contract of adhesion and therefore should be interpreted in my favor when ambiguous. And I'm willing to argue that a violation of the ToS is a mere breach of contract and Google is entitled only to actual damages for any violation of it (and that the damages in this case is $0). It's only if my actions jeopardize the entire project that I'm going to ask for input on this list. It's only the copyright/database laws that I'm worried about. None of this has anything to do with permission, anyway. If Google's legal department gives permission, then it doesn't matter whether it's a violation of the ToS, they are permitting us something beyond the ToS. I'm not sure exactly what Google plans to do with Street View in the future. If all they want is to protect against someone else creating their own Street View, then they should have no concern about our "copying" of street names, turn restrictions, etc. In fact, it benefits them for us to do it if we in turn give them permission to use our database to correct their data. On the other hand, it's possible Google has long term plans to use Street View to create its own map data rather than rely on other people's. If that's the case, then we're probably out of luck - maybe in a few years it'll be feasible to make our own multiway camera to stick on our roofs. OSM does have a decent case to argue for Google letting us copy non-photographic information from GSV. Let us do that, or we'll create our own GSV and compete with you directly.
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
