>From what I recall, but this is not canon (insert disqualification etc) Ed Parsons from Google has basically said in one of his personal blog posts in 2008 [1] that interpreting the location of a point to create a new bit of data using their aerial imagery does not make it derived data, because the person uses their own judgement. This is contrasted to using say, the corner of a building in google maps to do the same thing. But legally, I think it is still completely uncertain. In a couple of projects, with the mapwarper (doing similar things), most institutions do not use the Google supplied Aerial imagery, but a couple do.
I believe the example given was the mapping of recycling centres based on the interpretation of the imagery. He used the words "Skill and judgement". I think, however, that this doesn't really allow OSM to trace wholesale the google imagery - but for cases where a persons skill and judgement are called, I think that it should be okay. Tim [1] http://www.edparsons.com/2008/10/who-map-is-it-anyway/ On 10 March 2012 14:45, Kate Chapman <k...@maploser.com> wrote: > Hi Paul, > > This isn't a matter of one or two maps. PLOTS is building a "edit" in > OSM button for their website, there are already tons of maps that have > been made: http://publiclaboratory.org/archive?page=1 > > -Kate > > > > On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Paul Norman <penor...@mac.com> wrote: > >> From: andrzej zaborowski [mailto:balr...@gmail.com] > >> Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Digitizing from Balloon Maps > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> On 10 March 2012 03:51, Kate Chapman <k...@maploser.com> wrote: > >> > Hey All, > >> > > >> > I was wondering what the license implications would be from digitizing > >> > from balloon maps that had been rectified from other satellite > >> > imagery. > >> > > >> > - So let's say you fly photos of an area > >> > - To stitch them together you use Google Maps imagery as the base > >> > - What is the deal with the imagery at that point? > >> > - If I trace the imagery is that really derived from Google Maps? > >> > > >> > It seems insignificant to me, but I wanted to get some insight. > >> > >> I would also like to know, especially in the context of Jeff Warren's > >> mail on talk. I think the legal side here is easier than the community > >> customs. I have heard both "obviously if it's rectified using Google, > >> it can't be used in OSM", and "obviously it doesn't matter". > >> > >> I think Bing support in Map Knitter (even though legally it's in the > >> same bandwagon as Google) would have a better community acceptance. > >> Where I tried rectifying something with Map Knitter, Google imagery was > >> useless because of complete cloud cover, too. > > > > I'm not a lawyer but I believe standard practice for imagery providers > here > > is to rectify based on a database of survey points and I don't believe > the > > providers regard their imagery as a derivative work of the database. Next > > time I'm at the city I'll ask them. > > > > If you are rectifying, try to get *some* survey points for your warping. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > legal-talk mailing list > > legal-talk@openstreetmap.org > > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk > > _______________________________________________ > legal-talk mailing list > legal-talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk >
_______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
