On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 7:49 AM, jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com
Additionally there is a video talk from the SoTM 08 from Ed Parsons on
this topic
http://vimeo.com/6751141
Ed Parsons: What Map Maker is / is not at SOTM08
Additionally, please see this blog post , it is even more relevant to
our
Andre Engels wrote:
The thought process (note: I do not agree with it) goes like this:
* A map or a sattelite photograph is copyrighted material
* Taking a location from a map or a photograph is getting a derivative
work from it
* You are not allowed to make a derivative work from a
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 9:10 AM, Nikola Smolenski smole...@eunet.rs wrote:
Andre Engels wrote:
The thought process (note: I do not agree with it) goes like this:
* A map or a sattelite photograph is copyrighted material
* Taking a location from a map or a photograph is getting a derivative
In a message dated 4/1/2010 12:24:31 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com writes:
As I said, the selection of these coordinates is a work, and if you
dont have any image available you cannot do so.
What is the contract between you and google to use this data? Are you
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 10:00 AM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 4/1/2010 12:24:31 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com writes:
As I said, the selection of these coordinates is a work, and if you
dont have any image available you cannot do so.
What is the
Hoi,
The COLLECTION of such facts is a work. A single fact is not a work. The
collection of single facts creates a new collection however, claiming
copyright because of it being expressed in a certain format is similar to
Microsoft claiming copyright to all MS/Word documents.
When an aggregation
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 10:57 AM, Gerard Meijssen
gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote:
A good counter example is the use of OpenStreetMap after the
Haiti disaster.. it is based on the same kinds of data that is put into
doubt in a different context.
That was done only after OSM received explicit
By the way, this seems like a good time to mention
http://www.google.com/moderator/#15/e=1d33t=1d33.40q=1d33.10309 and
http://www.systemed.net/blog/?p=100
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
Hoi,
We are talking at cross purposes. What I am talking about are applications
of geo data like these
-
http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.com/2010/03/swedes-have-their-map-support.html
-
http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.com/2010/03/danes-have-their-map-support.html
The data in both
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Gerard Meijssen
gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi,
We are talking at cross purposes. What I am talking about are applications
of geo data like these
-
http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.com/2010/03/swedes-have-their-map-support.html
-
On this note, there is no real discussion of the copyright and
licensing issues on this page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Obtaining_geographic_coordinates#Google_tools
It says :
There are various ways to obtain geographic coordinates. Note that
regardless of the source of coordinates,
Hoi,
The position of a bridge, a building, a statue is a fact. It cannot be
copyrighted and the only reason for attribution of a map used to obtain such
a coordinate is to allow other people to verify the process. Coordinates are
available on many Wikipedia articles, they come from a wide variety
Guys,
Lets get back to one point : terms of service.
We are talking about copyright here the whole time, but the contract
agreement in the terms of service are much more binding, they override
your copyright.
If the terms of service do not allow mass database extraction, WP is
violating that on
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 2:28 PM, jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com
jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote:
Guys,
Lets get back to one point : terms of service.
We are talking about copyright here the whole time, but the contract
agreement in the terms of service are much more binding, they override
jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote:
Guys,
Lets get back to one point : terms of service.
We are talking about copyright here the whole time, but the contract
agreement in the terms of service are much more binding, they override
your copyright.
If the terms of service do not allow mass
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 2:59 PM, Kwan Ting Chan k...@ktchan.info wrote:
jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote:
Guys,
Lets get back to one point : terms of service.
We are talking about copyright here the whole time, but the contract
agreement in the terms of service are much more binding,
In a message dated 4/1/2010 5:28:50 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com writes:
Guys,
Lets get back to one point : terms of service.
We are talking about copyright here the whole time, but the contract
agreement in the terms of service are much more binding, they
Mike,
We're now some 40 messages into this thread. I went back and checked,
and not a single poster supports your arguments.
I appreciate that you've been polite and have made a good-faith effort
to argue your case in a civil manner, but I think it's clear that this
you're not winning this
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 9:35 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
Maps are not Points. You're setting up an argument quite different
from that with which you started. They aren't great maps, they're awful
maps
:) Explain your bias! Do you work for Google Maps and are just here
trolling us?
Hi there,
I am working alot on openstreetmap.org and there seems to be a big
difference in how the copyrights of the maps are handled in Wikipedia.
In wikipedia you will find maps that have no real sources claimed, and
they are not checked.
People can just upload any and all maps that they
In a message dated 3/31/2010 12:21:33 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com writes:
In openstreetmap we are not allowed to import the positions of items
based on the locations in wikipedia because they are derived from
geoeye/googlemaps for the most part. So there is a
Hoi,
In Wikipedia we have many subjects that have geo coordinates associated with
them. They are facts. Facts cannot be copyrighted. When these facts are
harvested by data mining Wikipedia, you do not have a derived work from what
is the origin of these facts, you have a new collection of facts
(This is meant as a reply to GerardM, not WJhonson)
Pure data such as longitude and latitude, in the US, is treated significantly
differently from the act of creation and determination of a map, particularly
one that involves inherent pictorial or photographic nature.
It is true that maps are
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dan Rosenthal wrote:
(This is meant as a reply to GerardM, not WJhonson)
Pure data such as longitude and latitude, in the US, is treated
significantly differently from the act of creation and
determination of a map, particularly one that involves
I would say claiming copyright on a map is legitimate but I think the big
issue here is the geotag's themselves (i.e the locations) since so many
people use google maps or another tool to find the geo location. The
locations themselves is what we have decided are facts and therefore
copyrightable
Sorry. they are facts and therefore NOT copyrightable.
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 4:19 PM, James Alexander jameso...@gmail.comwrote:
I would say claiming copyright on a map is legitimate but I think the big
issue here is the geotag's themselves (i.e the locations) since so many
people use google
Hoi.
The facts harvested from Wikipedia have to be compiled in order to be used
in an overlay. The format of the overlay may be determined by the
application that uses such an overlay. The process of creating such an
overlay however is mechanical, slavish, it has no relation whatsoever with
the
Now some background :
Today, I found a map of Albania with no sources mentioned , and
currently I am working on mapping Albania. That is why I bring this
up. With all these maps in wikipedia, how can the authors possible be
the creators of the whole map, there are very few cases of maps that
are
In a message dated 3/31/2010 1:30:39 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com writes:
(e) use the Products in a manner that gives you or any other person
access to mass downloads or bulk feeds of any Content, including but
not limited to numerical latitude or longitude
The use of the google maps (and other copyrighted maps) are restricted and
derivatives of those maps similarly restricted. However what the actual geo
points that you may get from those systems are not restricted (because they
are not copyrightable).
It is an understandable confusion to be
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:45 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 3/31/2010 1:30:39 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com writes:
(e) use the Products in a manner that gives you or any other person
access to mass downloads or bulk feeds of any Content,
In a message dated 3/31/2010 1:56:45 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com writes:
The issue is the location of things that are only visible using high
quality sat images from googlemaps and co. We don't have those
positions for many of the locations and they are only
On Mar 31, 2010, at 4:04 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
Since Google themselves did not produce these, they don't
own their own satellites. So from where did they get them?
I don't have to own your camera to use it, and claim copyright. :)
___
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:45 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 3/31/2010 1:30:39 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com writes:
(e) use the Products in a manner that gives
In a message dated 3/31/2010 2:08:25 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
pbeaude...@wikimedia.org writes:
I don't have to own your camera to use it, and claim copyright. :)
--
You are *taking* the picture however, with a mechanical device while you
are excersizing creativity over it's
I'm not familiar with the particular project/maps/geodata in
question, but a blanket statement that claiming copyright on a map
is absurdity is itself wrong.
-Dan
If I'm not mistaken, the thread is not about the copyrightability of
maps themselves, but the copyrightability of
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:19 PM, James Alexander jameso...@gmail.com wrote:
I would say claiming copyright on a map is legitimate but I think the big
issue here is the geotag's themselves (i.e the locations) since so many
people use google maps or another tool to find the geo location. The
Mike,
Thank you for starting this thread. The most important point, from my
perspective, is that the policies on OSM and Wikipedia are not
compatible, in a way that makes geodata from Wikipedia time-consuming
or impossible for some OSM editors to use.
We should certainly see how we can align
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 5:42 AM, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote:
Mike,
Thank you for starting this thread. The most important point, from my
perspective, is that the policies on OSM and Wikipedia are not
compatible, in a way that makes geodata from Wikipedia time-consuming
or
39 matches
Mail list logo
