It is simply a case of YMMV depending at least on

- territory where the data is being used

- territory where the data was entered

- territory from where the data is distributed

and for each of the above

- legislation (copyright and other)

- case law

and any ToS/contracts associated with the use of the closed source (and
naturally how far such ToS can go and apply depends on the 5 points
above too)*.

Put differently: it makes sense for OSM to be conservative and when in
doubt not to use any material for which we don't have explicit
permission or similar.

* not to mention political arguments, a la the US "we have more nukes
than you" enforcement of national regulations outside of its borders

Am 21.09.2016 um 09:54 schrieb Janko Mihelić:
> sri, 21. ruj 2016. u 08:54 joost schouppe <
> <>> napisao je:
>     Using copyrighted material to spot errors in OSM is still
>     copyright violation (well, a specialist in copyright should
>     confirm that).
> This is an interesting case. I think we are allowed to spot errors
> using closed sources, but we can not use the source to say what is the
> right solution. It's as if we are looking for differences between
> models, and then using only the difference data to look further into
> the matter using other sources (survey, Bing..).
> This is interesting to me because I was thinking about making a
> service that lists differences between OSM data and outside closed
> source data, and then showing only what is different. Then people
> would use that "difference data" to direct their mapping efforts. For
> example, take closed data about opening hours, compare to OSM, and
> only show which OSM data is wrong according to the closed source. Then
> mappers would go survey the shop. Would this be OK?
> Janko
> _______________________________________________
> legal-talk mailing list

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

legal-talk mailing list

Reply via email to