Just to add my own opinion to this particular thread. The argument that OS "introduce" known errors into their data is incorrect. There was a time when it was not possible to map secret military installations due to a threat to National Security, in these cases "filler" data was added to the maps. However, with the advent of satellite imagery being commercially available this is no longer a concern and so does not happen any more.
We can trace our data due to the way in which we collect and create it, by examining third party data that is alleged to be copied from our own we are able to determine whether or not it is ours. We also finger print some of our raster products and use particular colour maps - all of which help us to determine whether or not our data has been copied. I personally believe that it is essential to copyright data in order to protect it, otherwise why would anybody bother to collect it in the first place. It costs money to collect the data and generate output, it is not unreasonable for a company to expect to be able to protect their investment and expenditure. If a company can't, within reason, protect its revenues then why should it bother to collect the data. If this view was then taken by everyone we would end up in a situation where would have no data or at the very least lots of very low quality data. Colin Henderson GI Development Ordnance Survey *************************************************************** For more information on Ordnance Survey products and services, visit our web site at http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk *************************************************************** --------------------------------------------------------------------- List hosting provided by Directions Magazine | www.directionsmag.com | To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
