I might be able to add some small tidbits that will support the premise
that the United States Legal System is a convoluted mess.

Land Surveyors must often base decision on legal principles codified in
state or federal law, or even worse, principles embodies in case law, or
previous court decisions.

There are two (2) problems with this system:

[1] Laws don't just vary from nation to nation, they vary form
jurisdiction to jurisdiction. In the United States a sound legal
principle used as a basis for a decision in the State of California
might not be a sound legal principle in Nevada, which is right next
door.

[2] Judges are imperfect people, influenced by the same biases, flaws,
and imperfections as the rest of us. Judges are also experts at the law,
not everything else. They can't be experts at intellectual property,
patents, geodesy, computer science...This means that there understanding
of the all the different legal issues presented to them is somewhat
limited. 

There are lots of situations in which a Land Surveyor has presented on
sound legal principles, but the judge doesn't agree. Either because he
doesn't really understand the issues like the experts, or because he is
biased in some other way.

In the Land Surveying profession we are taught to stay out of court.
This isn't just good advice because of the outrageous legal fees. Courts
are often illogical and unpredictable in there decisions because of the
human element that is involved. (We haven't even touched on the
political influences that affect courts.)

I'm not sure how you keep the issues we are discussing out of court.
When you are a land surveyor there are specific things you can do. (Like
getting the land owners to understand the practicality of agreeing when
they get a quote for a laywer's hourly rate.) This situation isn't so
simple.

One important thing to remember: A legal battle will be just as
unpredictable for the mega-corporation as it would for OSM. Those mega
corps aren't going to take that risk unless they really feel like they
are going to loose a lot of money.

Landon


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of P Kishor
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 7:16 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Geowanking] Flickrs WOE stuff

On 11/7/08, Richard Fairhurst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> P Kishor wrote:
>
>  > Per USC 17, Section 101
>
> > Per USC 17, Section 102 (b)
>
>
> Yebbut: contract, trade secret, different jurisdictions.

I am not sure what you are referring to by the above comment... USC
Title 17 deals with Copyrights. Trade Secrets are a different Title,
the UTSA notwithstanding. And contract law is completely different.

That said, your note about "different jurisdictions" is key. All this
differs significantly from country to country.

Every now and then we see emails about "derivative works" but the
bottom-line is... no one really knows.

And, since all of us (I am assuming) are not lawyers, we have a very
rudimentary understanding of an unclear subject to begin with. Well, I
decided to do something about this, so I enrolled in two law school
courses this semester here at the UW Law School here in Madison --
courses on IP in general and on Patents in specific. The main
appreciation I am getting from the courses is that this stuff is
waaaaaaaaay more fuzzy and muddy and convoluted than we think. Most
everything can be argued in 6 different painstakingly tortuous ways.
Of course, since I am learning US law, my basic knowledge is only
about the US code, although we do touch on some international aspects.


>
>
>  > In any case, all this would be settled only if someone gets sued
>
>
> Absolutely.


Right. That really would be the only way to find out, because that is
really how law proceeds. Until then, all is speculation.

There are a few map related examples that can be seen at the
Copyright.gov website, but again, that is the US perspective. I guess,
in that sense, all these discussions about IP make no sense on a
global basis. Best would be to start with understanding one's own
jurisdiction and then proceeding outwards.



>
>  cheers
>
> Richard
>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Geowanking mailing list
>  [email protected]
>  http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org
>


-- 
Puneet Kishor http://punkish.eidesis.org/
Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies http://www.nelson.wisc.edu/
Open Source Geospatial Foundation (OSGeo) http://www.osgeo.org/

_______________________________________________
Geowanking mailing list
[email protected]
http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org


Warning:
Information provided via electronic media is not guaranteed against defects 
including translation and transmission errors. If the reader is not the 
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you 
have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately.

_______________________________________________
Geowanking mailing list
[email protected]
http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org

Reply via email to