Re: [talk-ph] Bacolod is still a big problem
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 11:50 AM, maning sambale emmanuel.samb...@gmail.com wrote: 2. Bacolod has good traces uploaded not much, but it seems to show very good coverage at least in the city center. See this image of JOSM: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3324/4623396303_e2f6be5fe6_o.jpg Hmmm, are you sure these are just GPS traces? The image seems to show the nodes in the OSM database. The sawtooth coastline is quite visible. ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] Bacolod is still a big problem
Hi, this topic is discussed every now and then. Facts are free, but you can't use the help of copyright protected material. If you only copy one house/street/whatever maybe that doesn't matter. But what if all of us are doing this? You end up with a 100% copy of the map and than even you will agree, that this is a no go. So where to drew the line? It's impossible and that's why the community agrees not to use copyright protected maps even for a poi to copy. What you can to with this maps is comparing for areas which need attention, go there and do your mappings. Or use openstreetbugs to report them, so others can pick up. OSM license allows anyone to use our data for any purpose and without the need to give anything back, even sell it and make money out of your/our work. They only have to mention the license. That's the open part in OSM. But you can't expect to do everyone like this and we respect this. Take a look at the OSM history, e.g. http://www.geofabrik.de/en/gallery/history/index.html It's amazing what has been done only with free sources or donated date in this short periode of time. We should be proud of it and keep the OSM free from data of copyright protected sources. If there are white spaces, give it some time and somebody will do traces and close them. We need more mappers. Also note, that google and others can't give away what they don't have. The images on goolge maps/earth are bought from other companys which own the copyright - you can see the company's name on the map. Maybe this will change if they are using the images from their own satellite. AFAIK they wanted to wait with updating gmaps when they have images from the whole world. IMHO they should have them already - we'll see. There is even an difference in the yahoo images free to copy and the ones on the yahoo webpage which are not free to copy. See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Yahoo!_Aerial_Imagery On the other hand pls. be aware that not everybody want's to upload this gps tracks due to privacy concerns or some body could find out about one's nice and quiet camping place. Questions about anonymizing gps data arise on the user mailing list form time to time. But in this case ppl. should respond different to questions about the source. Greetings Ray Craig wrote: Maybe there is something fundamental that I don't get, but, let me ask a question, please. How is it possible that a location of a road or building or anything can be copyrighted? I understand not copying entire maps, etc., from a source and then claiming it as your own is contrary to copyright, but facts, and a road location is a fact, not something created from someone's imagination. Google itself allows businesses to use tools to correct the location of that business if it is in error on Google's maps. Nobody is copying and distributing Google satellite images, nor are they distributing other Google properties. I think this worry about copyright violations is a knee-jerk reaction and would not stand up in a court of law. Big companies with big law firms backing them up is very intimidating, but that doesn't change the fact that you should be able to refer to a Google map or image to confirm a road location or other geographical entity. I see this as fair use. Also, thousands of people around the world have contributed to mapping for Google through efforts around the Haiti and Chile earthquakes. I'd say copyright is a bit dicey in that situation because Google only facilitated the mapping. Also, thousands upon thousands of buildings have been placed in Google Earth, thanks only to users like us. Myself, I have contributed mapping and 3D buildings. Is OSM open to the world? If it is, then Google can use OSM data. If Google sued OSM for improving maps using Google's data only to integrate that into their own products, that would be major hypocrisy. I'm sick of corporations creating this atmosphere of we're going to sue your asses off at the drop of a hat. It's a sad thing, and well-minded people like those contributing to a better world via OSM and other similar projects should not have the spectre of litigation hanging over their heads. ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] Bacolod is still a big problem
Hi Craig, I saw this question several times here and there and can not agree completely. I think that Facts/Locations can not be copyrighted indeed, but maps can. It takes quite a lot of work to represent the locations of items accurately on maps. It's much easier to copy from an existing map. (Why would some OSM mappers be tempted if this was not the case?) So it seems reasonable to me to protect this work by a copyright. When you copy from a map, even small portions, you don't copy facts, but a more or less faithful representation someone else made. If you copy Google maps, you even copying someone's imagination ! Here Google has several non existing roads on the map : http://sautter.com/map/?zoom=17lat=10.3468lon=123.91864layers=B0TF Even comparing just the location should not be done, since the map seems offset... The above is also true for the satellite images (although maybe less obviously). Several years ago, I saw a duplicate parallel road on the border of stitched images (Each of them ending in a blurry house on opposite sides at some distance). I was unable to find it now, but I'm sure you'll be able to find some artifacts if you look for them. Cheers, Totor --- On Sun, 5/16/10, Craig wrote: From: Craig Subject: Re: [talk-ph] Bacolod is still a big problem To: Andre Marcelo-Tanner Cc: talk-ph@openstreetmap.org Date: Sunday, May 16, 2010, 4:09 AM Maybe there is something fundamental that I don't get, but, let me ask a question, please. How is it possible that a location of a road or building or anything can be copyrighted? I understand not copying entire maps, etc., from a source and then claiming it as your own is contrary to copyright, but facts, and a road location is a fact, not something created from someone's imagination. [...] ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] Bacolod is still a big problem
Hi, everyone. Thank you for your comments. I do appreciate them all, and I respect you all for giving them freely. I will, of course, follow OSM guidelines to the letter, and will in no way jeopardize all of the hard work that has been done before my very recent arrival. I am, like many, simply frustrated at how copyright is used at a weapon and how it does, in fact, stifle creativity and advancements in many areas. You are all aware of this, of course. Best to you all, Craig. On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 5:11 AM, Totor totor_...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi Craig, I saw this question several times here and there and can not agree completely. I think that Facts/Locations can not be copyrighted indeed, but maps can. It takes quite a lot of work to represent the locations of items accurately on maps. It's much easier to copy from an existing map. (Why would some OSM mappers be tempted if this was not the case?) So it seems reasonable to me to protect this work by a copyright. When you copy from a map, even small portions, you don't copy facts, but a more or less faithful representation someone else made. If you copy Google maps, you even copying someone's imagination ! Here Google has several non existing roads on the map : http://sautter.com/map/?zoom=17lat=10.3468lon=123.91864layers=B0TF Even comparing just the location should not be done, since the map seems offset... The above is also true for the satellite images (although maybe less obviously). Several years ago, I saw a duplicate parallel road on the border of stitched images (Each of them ending in a blurry house on opposite sides at some distance). I was unable to find it now, but I'm sure you'll be able to find some artifacts if you look for them. Cheers, Totor --- On *Sun, 5/16/10, Craig * wrote: From: Craig Subject: Re: [talk-ph] Bacolod is still a big problem To: Andre Marcelo-Tanner Cc: talk-ph@openstreetmap.org Date: Sunday, May 16, 2010, 4:09 AM Maybe there is something fundamental that I don't get, but, let me ask a question, please. How is it possible that a location of a road or building or anything can be copyrighted? I understand not copying entire maps, etc., from a source and then claiming it as your own is contrary to copyright, but facts, and a road location is a fact, not something created from someone's imagination. [...] ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] Bacolod is still a big problem
Many people already argued that copying from aerial imagery is not governed by copyright law. Case law proved it: http://www.systemed.net/blog/?p=100 However, Google terms of use explicitly do not allow this: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/2009/03/17/google-mapmaker-and-openstreetmap/ That said, I echo Eugene's statement. Do not test this slippery and complicated legal argument in OSM. We maybe impatient with the progress of OSM in many areas in the country. But in due time, we can get it done the OSM way. -- cheers, maning -- Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/ blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ -- ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] Bacolod is still a big problem
Hi Craig, Good points overall. I agree that some of these copyright scaremongering isn't valid and that possibly in some jurisdictions (probably the US, but not the UK), copying facts from a map image is OK. But for everyone's information, OSM chooses to be on the safe and cautious side. Unless something is black-and-white (we can definitely trace/copy or definitely not) the project has decided to adopt a strict no-copying policy. It's possible that someone can test the legal waters by bringing to court (in some limited jurisdiction) some of the issues, but OSM is not the place to force the issue. As for Google itself, Ed Parsons, their Geospatial Technologist, has hinted[1] that tracing stuff from Google's own or licensed data and placing it into OSM is a no-no. That's why we are alarmed if we see roads that match Google's imagery (especially if they match the extent of under-construction roads). [1] http://www.edparsons.com/2009/09/liberating-your-my-maps-data/ Eugene On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 12:09 PM, Craig nuclearmo...@gmail.com wrote: Maybe there is something fundamental that I don't get, but, let me ask a question, please. How is it possible that a location of a road or building or anything can be copyrighted? I understand not copying entire maps, etc., from a source and then claiming it as your own is contrary to copyright, but facts, and a road location is a fact, not something created from someone's imagination. Google itself allows businesses to use tools to correct the location of that business if it is in error on Google's maps. Nobody is copying and distributing Google satellite images, nor are they distributing other Google properties. I think this worry about copyright violations is a knee-jerk reaction and would not stand up in a court of law. Big companies with big law firms backing them up is very intimidating, but that doesn't change the fact that you should be able to refer to a Google map or image to confirm a road location or other geographical entity. I see this as fair use. Also, thousands of people around the world have contributed to mapping for Google through efforts around the Haiti and Chile earthquakes. I'd say copyright is a bit dicey in that situation because Google only facilitated the mapping. Also, thousands upon thousands of buildings have been placed in Google Earth, thanks only to users like us. Myself, I have contributed mapping and 3D buildings. Is OSM open to the world? If it is, then Google can use OSM data. If Google sued OSM for improving maps using Google's data only to integrate that into their own products, that would be major hypocrisy. I'm sick of corporations creating this atmosphere of we're going to sue your asses off at the drop of a hat. It's a sad thing, and well-minded people like those contributing to a better world via OSM and other similar projects should not have the spectre of litigation hanging over their heads. Take care, all. Craig. Anyway, I'm not here to argue a point or start a flame war. On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 8:35 PM, Andre Marcelo-Tanner an...@enthropia.com wrote: How can he draw the exact road alignments on a blank map just from what he knows. Yes he may know what road is here and there but he can not trace it from Google Maps or another copyrighted map source. He can not even align it by comparing it to Google maps and adjusting. Sure he can add POIs from memory, but road alignment and position is something that requires a map source with permission or GPS traces correct? Pls explain to him how if there are maps copied from a copyright source, OSM can be sued and shutdown by a lawsuit, that is why the organization is very careful and vigilant about its mapping sources. He wouldn't want OSM to be shut down right? ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph -- http://vaes9.codedgraphic.com ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
Re: [talk-ph] Bacolod is still a big problem
I know. :) But, judging from the way he/she treated Totor and Avelinosk, I assume that this is just the way he/she reacts to certain things. On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 9:05 AM, ianlopez ian_lopez_1...@yahoo.com wrote: Manila, we have a problem. MTBBCD is now pissed off ( http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/MTBBCD/diary/10668 ). He's calling you out, Maning (plus he/she misspelled your name) Tony Montana: Me, I want what's coming to me. Manny Ribera: Oh, well what's coming to you? Tony Montana: The world, chico, and everything in it. - http://ianlopez1115.wordpress.com/ --- On Thu, 5/13/10, maning sambale emmanuel.samb...@gmail.com wrote: From: maning sambale emmanuel.samb...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [talk-ph] Bacolod is still a big problem To: OSM talk-ph@openstreetmap.org Date: Thursday, May 13, 2010, 8:35 PM http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Maning/copyright_detection_notes#Bacolod_-_between_April_to_May_of_2010 let's wait and see. On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: I'm still seeing plenty of new editors and high editing activity in the Bacolod area. One example is this subdivision that was drawn in. The roads match the Google satellite imagery but there is no GPX trace to back it up: http://sautter.com/map/?zoom=16lat=10.71804lon=122.96763layers=00B000TF ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph -- cheers, maning -- Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/ blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ -- ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph -- cheers, maning -- Freedom is still the most radical idea of all -N.Branden wiki: http://esambale.wikispaces.com/ blog: http://epsg4253.wordpress.com/ -- ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
[talk-ph] Bacolod is still a big problem
I'm still seeing plenty of new editors and high editing activity in the Bacolod area. One example is this subdivision that was drawn in. The roads match the Google satellite imagery but there is no GPX trace to back it up: http://sautter.com/map/?zoom=16lat=10.71804lon=122.96763layers=00B000TF ___ talk-ph mailing list talk-ph@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ph
