Mikel got me started but i'll try and contain myself ;) 

The license holder can claim whatever they rights they want, but this doesn't 
mean they are valid/enforceable. Because the law/courts move so much slower (or 
sometimes sillier, re:Micky Mouse Copyright Act), we (as consumers of spatial 
data) can do a few things: 1) wait until terms of the license change (but these 
are written by lawyers and they want to protect their clients' interest--the 
state, an authority, etc...--and therefore unlikely to be made friendlier for 
the consuming public); 2) ask for permission (in many cases very unlikely) and 
sue. This is how many laws end up getting rewritten as the courts shouldn't 
legislate (ok, i'm drifting into a political realm here so i will restrain 
myself. again). it's no big deal in the sense of it happens all the time in the 
US (duh!) and it's how Google will figure out their book scanning project as 
they've already been sued by several publishers, etc..Oh yeah, same goes for 
gootube. A third idea is to just go ahead and use it. If you are contacted by 
the DOT progress is being made! And if not, you might ask "why didn't i do this 
a while ago?" to mikel's point, this is all taxpayer financed spatial data and 
in the US we have a right to it. That said, many of our rights have been 
stifled. 

i know this wasn't the intent of the original post but i couldn't help myself. 

ian 

Ian White :: Urban Mapping, Inc 
690 Fifth Street Suite 200 :: San Francisco CA 94107 
T 415.946.8170 :: F 866.385.8266 :: www.urbanmapping.com 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mikel Maron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
To: [email protected] 
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 9:00:45 AM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles 
Subject: Re: [Geowanking] Re: California roads data 




As is, it's probably incompatible with how OSM operates, as the data is 
transmitted through an API, 
in parts, mixed with other data, and distributed as rendered tiles. The license 
really only considers the 
case where the data was distributed as is .. I don't think they've considered a 
use case like OSM. 

I'd suggest it's worth inquiring with the MN DOT, explaining the goals of OSM 
and how it works, 
and see if they'd have any problem with OSM using their data with a different 
type of attribution 
(something like a note in the wiki would be perfectly doable). 

That data was collected with tax payer money, so really it should be available 
for the us to use. 


----- Original Message ---- 
From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
To: [email protected] 
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 3:35:29 PM 
Subject: [Geowanking] Re: California roads data 


(continuing down the OSM tangent...) 
I was thinking the same thing, Reid, but in the metadata for the MN DOT 
roads, under Use Constraints, it says 
"By accepting this data, the user agrees not to transmit this data or 
provide access to it or any part of it to another party unless the user 
shall include with the data a copy of the disclaimer." 
Does that rule out use in something like OSM? 

Brad 

> 
> Message: 2 
> Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 17:06:39 -0500 
> From: Reid Priedhorsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> Subject: [Geowanking] Re: California roads data 
> To: [email protected] 
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed 
> 
> Mikel Maron wrote: 
>> Hi Jennifer 
>> 
>> Another option could be OpenStretMap, http://www.openstreetmap.org/ 
>> 
>> We have long intended to jump start in the US by uploading TIGER into 
>> the OSM database. Once in OSM, the data is ready to be improved apon .. 
>> creation of custom basemaps is what it's all about. 
> 
> Many states maintain base maps which are better than TIGER. I think it 
> would be better to do this on a state-by-state basis. Here in Minnesota 
> you can download the data from MNDOT. 
> 
> For the OP: I'm not sure if Caltrans is the CA equivalent of MNDOT, but 
> that's where I'd start. 
> 
> Good luck, 
> 
> Reid 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------ 
> 
> _______________________________________________ 
> Geowanking mailing list 
> [email protected] 
> http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking 
> 
> 
> End of Geowanking Digest, Vol 40, Issue 18 
> ****************************************** 
> 


_______________________________________________ 
Geowanking mailing list 
[email protected] 
http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking 

_______________________________________________
Geowanking mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking

Reply via email to