----- Original Message -----
From: "Grant Slater" <[email protected]>
To: "Licensing and other legal discussions."
<[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2010 3:29 PM
Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Someone already had a look at the Bing
Termsof
Use?
On 19 December 2010 14:40, David Groom <[email protected]> wrote:
The licence PDF states:
"Any updates you make to the OpenStreetMap map via the
Application (even if not published to third parties) must be contributed
back to openstreetmaps.org."
Which is NOT the same as stating "Microsoft have directly stated that
Bing
imagery may be used to update OSM".
Indeed, had Microsoft have directly stated that Bing imagery may be used
to
update OSM, then I suspect you would have pointed to a paragraph which
backed up that assertion.
As I've written before[2] the only direct mention Microsoft have made of
derived data made from tracing Bing Imagery is their statement that it
isn't
allowed [3].
Have you read? Microsoft mention a whole lot more than what link to....
http://www.bing.com/community/site_blogs/b/maps/archive/2010/12/01/bing-maps-aerial-imagery-in-openstreetmap.aspx
Try the google cache version: http://bit.ly/eUjkKS
Yes Grant, I have read both of those, in particular the statement on both
which says "To learn more and see the full terms of use, please see the Bing
Maps Imagery Editor license."
Therefore to comment on the terms of use I decided to refer to the licence,
and not the blog posts you refer to, since the blogs tell me to refer to the
licence.
What you link to in [3] is Bing's standard terms for everyone else...
Not what applies for OSM.
Could you please refer me to the source for why these terms do not apply to
OSM? Particularly in view of the fact that, as I referred to earlier, in
the Bing Maps Imagery Editor license it says the terms do apply (see section
6)
We have permission to derive NEW works from their imagery on condition
that the new works go into OSM.
Good, please show me where this is clearly stated. Then we can end the
discussion.
In fact, as I have also pointed out before, it is unclear that Bing Maps
Imagery Editor license actually apply to end users anyway, in which case the
only bit applicable to end users is [3] which says deriving works is not
allowed.
David
Also for fun... openstreetmapS.org _IS_ an OpenStreetMap domain and
belongs to the OSM. I spent ages getting it back from domain squatters
because it is such a common typo.
/ Grant
However, as I stated at the state of this message I suspect that
Microsoft
intend that Bing imagery may be used to update OSM, I also suspect that
they
intended the wording of the licence [1] to make it clear. On that
(admittedly probably unsound from a legal point of view), basis I have
been
tracing from Bing.
David
[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/images/d/d8/Bing_license.pdf
[2]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2010-December/005305.html
[3] http://www.microsoft.com/maps/assets/docs/terms.aspx
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
