Re: [OSM-talk] Breach of Copyright?

[Shaun McDonald]

On 25 Sep 2009, at 15:27, Dave F. wrote:

Chris Hill wrote:

Dave F. wrote:

Tom Hughes wrote:

On 25/09/09 13:16, Dave F. wrote:

I had an email conversation with the mapping officer from my local

their own maps.

council. He intimated that the data relating to public rights of way, and its associated copyright, would belong to the Local Council. When they make a legal order to record a public right of way they send a copy of the order to the OS who then copy the line of the right of way onto

In principle that is correct - the problem arises if the council has referred to an OS map in any way while defining the right of way. If they have then the OS will claim it is a derived work and infected by

their copyright etc.

Tom

The map he sent is titled as a Definitive Map. It has an OS underlay, but the information laid on top is compiled from Council gathered info. eg GPS survey equipment from an independent company employed to produce

the definitive maps.


This is the copyright at the bottom:

Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office © Crown Copyright.
Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to
prosecution or civil proceedings."


or not.


map just the ways of the path. Does that make a difference?

Cheers
Dave F.

It would come down to what you, I, council & OS mean by 'define' I suppose. "Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey mapping with the permission of the Note it says 'reproduced' not produced. Not sure if that is significant If I was to transfer the paths, I wouldn't be copying the OS underlay

The copyright statement at the bottom is all that counts. OS will claim it is a derivative work, so, they could claim that if you copy from it

into OSM you will be in breach their copyright.  The tracks only gain

think we can afford to ignore them.

Why not walk or cycle the routes with a GPS, collect the tracks and
photos, enjoy some time in the countryside, add the paths to the map
with a clear conscience and metaphorically thumb your nose at the OS?

context because they are on an OS map. The only way to settle who is in the wrong is to go to court, which OSM cannot afford. I don't like the wide-ranging claims that the OS make about derivative works but I don't

I do Chris, I do.
However, if I can find a way to /legally/ import data I don't see a
problem. Take a look at Transit Talk for examples of mass data import
(Naptan). It saves hell of a lot of time!

Shaun

Naptan is a specialist data set of points which is easy to import without huge conflicts or crap and inconsistent routing like with the TIGER data. In general large bulk imports are a bad thing and should be avoided. The amount of time that you spend sorting out legalities, making sure the scripts are working and then fixing the potentially broken imported data, you could have been out there and mapped it properly from first principles.

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk