Chris Hill wrote: >Sent: 25 September 2009 3:08 PM >To: OSM Talk >Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Breach of Copyright? > >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 >>>> 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 >>>> their own maps. >>>> >>> 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. >> It would come down to what you, I, council & OS mean by 'define' I >suppose. >> >> This is the copyright at the bottom: >> "Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey mapping with the permission of the >> Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office C Crown Copyright. >> Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to >> prosecution or civil proceedings." >> >> Note it says 'reproduced' not produced. Not sure if that is significant >> or not. >> >> If I was to transfer the paths, I wouldn't be copying the OS underlay >> map just the ways of the path. Does that make a difference? >> >> Cheers >> Dave F. >> >> >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 >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 >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?
+1 Cheers Andy > >Cheers, Chris > >_______________________________________________ >talk mailing list >talk@openstreetmap.org >http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
