Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 5:48 AM, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote: On Jul 10, 2014, at 07:54 PM, Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com wrote: That collective database is then generally used to produce works that are a produced work of the database of geocoding results as part of a collective database. I find the definition of geocoding in the proposed guideline a bit too large: Geocodes can be latitude/longitude pairs, full or partial addresses and or point of interest names.. Wikipedia is more limited: Geocoding is the process of finding associated geographic coordinates (often expressed as latitude and longitude) from other geographic data, such as street addresses, or ZIP codes (postal codes). Or in your definition of geocodes, only the coordinates are coming from OSM ? The risk of course is to create a full extract of all addresses/coordinates /POI's in OSM without the share-alike just because it's done through a geocoding process . How can we prevent this ? Pieren ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ODBL and imports
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Simon Poole si...@poole.ch wrote: - which leads to the question -should- you import ODbL licenced data. Obviously the answer to that is highly subjective, my position is that I wouldn't, but others may differ. So, you mean that the main objection to import ODBL data is a future licence change. But I remember some past messages here or elsewhere that the licence process is so heavy and requires so high acceptance that a licence change is almost impossible... (note that this argument would invalidate all types of third party licences and finally all imports). Pieren ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Corine Land Cover?
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 4:42 PM, Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com wrote: I agree. Importing Corine is a big mistake for any OSM community. The best way to use Corine is to make a rendered Corine layer, and then use that to help with mapping. blablabla, always the same song. Like if a blank page is better than rough landuses... With this concept, OSM should have never started with Yahoo imagery... I've seen a Corine import in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the data is awful. Not only that, it makes mapping a nightmare for any beginner. Like any other contributions, you are free to delete old landuses and make new ones better. Just do it. Btw, mapping landuse is any way a nightmare, even for experimented contributors. I did. Did you ? Back to the OP, many data sources imported requires some acknowledgment. This is either on the polygons or in changeset comments. Even if it is removed from elements, you find it in the history. (it's even better in the changeset comment since it is permanent) Pieren ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Permissibility of incorporating parts of an address from a business' website
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 12:25 AM, Iván Sánchez Ortega i...@sanchezortega.es wrote: Would it make a difference if the business is a large chain and had more than one address (possible a lot more than one address) on its website? In that case, you're doing a repeated extraction of non-substantial amounts of data. And that's perfectly OK to do under european law (and you retain all copyrights of the derived work of your repeated extraction). I'm not sure it has to do with non-substantial amounts of data. But business websites publishing their own address or list of addresses is reallly intended to be shared and republished everywhere. It would be different if the website is e.g. a directory of all shops of a given city and their opening hours. Even if you extract only the pharmacies/drugstores and it is a non-substantial amount of data, you will copy their work of collecting this information. Pieren ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Question about copyrighted hiking routes in France
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 4:11 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: Are they aware that all the data has been created independently, by surveying the trail - not by actually copying their data? I think you mix two things : the physical trails, paths which are not copyrighted and not discussed here. And the route, the itinerary which is all trails, paths, roads linked together and is the original work, the creation which is considered as copyrightable in France (as soon as it is considered as enough original). Pieren ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
[OSM-legal-talk] Question about copyrighted hiking routes in France
Hi all, I'm submitting here a question about the legality of keeping French long hiking routes called GR or GRP or PR in OSM. All these routes are very well known, have sign posts and references on the ground, e.g. the GR20 in Corsica (but many are still missing or very incomplete in OSM). See these examples in [1a] and [1b]. These routes have been created by the national hiking sport federation (FFRP, Fédération Française de Randonnée Pédestre). You can see them on the ground by the trail marks visible at regular intervals but also on most of the commercial maps in France. But we are facing two legal issues in France. The problems are not new but become more critical in my opinion (see below). First issue : it is the hiking route names themselves. For all of them created by the FFRP, the names are registered trademarks and cannot be used without permission (see question below). Second issue : the routes themselves are copyrighted. The list of trademarks is listed in the legal page of the FFRP web site([2]) : - (some are just used in books or commercial maps but) - GR® - GR Pays® - PR® - ... à pied - les environs de ... à pied - Sentiers des patrimoines are very common (especially the first 3 : GR, GR Pays (or GRP) and PR followed by a reference number. Question : the FFRP itself is an editor of hiking bookguides or has contracts with the IGN (the French state establishment for geographical information) for publishing commercial hiking maps, giving them royalties in return (an important income for the federation). So the FFRP is always actively contacting or bringing actions (sue) against private competitors or simple websites using their trademarks and routes on maps or book editors not paying any fees (see e.g. [3]). But some web sites seem to use them without fee ([4]). It seems that the FFRP is tolerating non-commercial use. Since 2009, 2 or 3 OSM contributors (including myself) tried to contact the FFRP to get the permission they request to use their copyrighted route names into OSM, wihout any reply until now. Earlier last year (Feb 2012), two members of the French local chapter met them physically and presented OSM. They showed some interest but repeated again and clearly that using the GR, PR, etc trademarks is not allowed without permission, a permission they didn't provide during that meeting (minutes available here [7]). They also didn't say anything about the future. it seems finally that they are looking for a replacement of their current map data provider (IGN) but they want to preserve their current commercial model. Note that the sign-posts (trail marks) are also protected (like a logo). After that meeting, we are several people thinking that we have the remove all references of the trademarks of the FFRP into OSM db, usually tagged in name or ref, either on ways or route relations or both. What's your opinion ? Second issue : it is maybe a more specific French issue here because the routes themselves can be copyrighted when they are considered as original work. A famous case confirmed this with the IGN (publishing the FFRP maps) sueing a guidebook editor [5] and confirmed by the highest court in France (1ere chambre de la cour de cassation de Paris, decision of 30 june 1998 [8]. I don't know if this is the same in other countries but a significant part of the OSM community in France would consider deleting the FFRP hiking routes completely (and not only the trademarks mentionned in Q1). Personnaly, I think that a route is not considered as an original work (or not enough original) in many jurisdictions. But still, keeping them in OSM is raising a legal insecurity in all DB extracts stored or distributed on French servers or applications. For these reasons, all FFRP hiking routes (represented in OSM by relations of type route, route=hiking) in France should be completely removed from the OSM database. What do you think ? Pieren [1a] http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1107414 [1b] http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/2650826 [2] http://www.ffrandonnee.fr/_67/mentions-legales.aspx (in French) [3] http://www.balades-pyrenees.com/numero_55.htm (in French) [4] http://www.gr-infos.com/ [5] http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichJuriJudi.do?oldAction=rechJuriJudiidTexte=JURITEXT06938477fastReqId=330410198fastPos=9 (in French) [6] http://hiking.lonvia.de/fr/?zoom=13lat=42.95532lon=-0.61968 [7] http://listes.openstreetmap.fr/wws/arc/ca/2012-02/msg0.html (in French, require ML registration first) [8] http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichJuriJudi.do?oldAction=rechJuriJudiidTexte=JURITEXT07041272fastReqId=109256579fastPos=1 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Question about copyrighted hiking routes in France
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote: I cannot see that indicating that there are signs with a particular text on the ground is infringing their trademark. I'd expect most name=* values on POIs in OSM to be a trademark (although not necessarily registered). I've tagged Coca-Cola bottling centers, Starbucks, McDonalds and many more objects with trademarked names. If the mapping is accurate then the trademarked name is being used accurately and there's no issue. If I started tagging every coffee shop as a Starbucks regardless of ownership then I'd be diluting their trademark and it'd be an issue. Similarly, their trademark would stop someone from creating another hiking route with the same name, but would not stop someone from saying that they were heading to hike the GR20 if that's in fact what they were planning to do. Again, you have to understand that this sport organization (FFRP) is publishing hiking bookguides and maps of their routes. It is their main income (plus some subsidies from the state). The FFRP made this trademark and copyright to protect them against commercial competitors on their market : their hiking routes. If the facts on the ground are covered by copyright I cannot see how a hiking network is different than a road network or a cycle network. Perhaps because a road network is in the public domaine. Here we speak about a copyrighted route. we map what is marked on the ground. This point has been long discussed on our local list. What you see on the ground is the trail markers. One problem is that the markers are also copyrighted (the colours and shapes) like a logo. Of course, if you put the McDonalds logo on OSM maps, McDo will be happy for the free ads and maps are not their business. But it might be different if you put an OS or USGS logo on your OSM maps. Second problem is that the trail markers are present along the route at short intervals. Even if we map only the marks, it will be easy to rebuild the whole route by extrapolation. I don't see that a French court's judgment should determine what goes in OSM, any more than a Chinese court. Even if the French court believes they have jurisdiction, they'd have to get any judgment domesticated by a British court. To accept the French judgment would gut OSM because it would apply to every hiking or road network in France, or for that matter, outside of France. Would you say the same if the court is in US or Canada ? Of course, we can build our mirror of the planet dump files and filter the compromised data. But is is the policy of OSM to ignore copyrights infringements outside UK ? Pieren ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Mistake in French translation of the CT
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 5:09 PM, Michael Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz wrote: None of us speak good French though, if anyone would like to provide an accurate translation, I would be grateful. I would suggest: par une majorité de 2/3 des contributeurs actifs. instead of the current: par une majorité de 2/3 des contributeurs actifs parmi les membres d’OSMF. Pieren ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
