Simon Poole <simon@...> writes: >> - mapper A (who has agreed to the CTs) creates a way >> - mapper B (who has not agreed) adjusts the way's geometry, creating >> some new nodes >> - mapper C (who has agreed) adjusts the position of those nodes >> >>In this case the third edit would have to be reverted
>IMHO no, if we assume that C is editing in good faith and actually >improving the geometry I would say that C is mapping in good faith and improving the existing geometry by building on the previous work done by B as well as his or her own surveying. I've often walked around with a GPS, then come back and adjusted road positions. I would not claim that the resulting position was "all my own work", particuarly as I did not wholesale replace the layout with my GPS track but rather tried to find a middle path that lay between the existing geometry and the GPS. Think about it another way - if mapper B had never existed, would the final result be the same? If mapper C is wholly replacing the geometry then the answer is yes, and the new layout is entirely C's work. If the answer is no, then C is contributing useful information but relying on B's earlier work. I contend that the second case is more common. Certainly if you started mapping and decided to totally ignore the existing layout of a way and replace it with your GPS trace or aerial tracing, you would be criticized by most of your fellow mappers. It is more normal to make small adjustments, combining both the new survey information and what went before. (If you did decide to throw away the earlier work and start from scratch, you might well just delete the existing object and make a new one.) >In general we have assumed that for example tracing from aerial imagery >and similar sources does not create a derived work in which the creator >of the imagery has rights (not that I necessarily agree with that). The >requirement has always been that we have had permission to trace at the >point in time that the tracing happened Right - we require permission. So for example tracing from Google Maps is not allowed, even if the legal theory about not creating a derived work turns out to be correct. I contend that mappers' contributions would need to be treated no different to any other external data source. If we have permission, we can use them, if not, we can't. If one mapper illegitimately adjusted the position of a way by using Google Earth as a backdrop, but then a second mapper moved the position of the nodes some more, normal OSM practice would still be to delete the tainted data. If there is to be an exception (which does seem to me like one rule for ordinary mappers, another rule for the OSMF) then I think the onus is on those proposing it to do the legal research making sure it is safe. Of course it is far more tempting to wave hands and pick whatever policy helps to get the whole business over with, but that is not a sound way to make legal decisions. -- Ed Avis <e...@waniasset.com> _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
