On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Richard Welty wrote:
> On 1/28/11 12:03 PM, Anthony wrote:
>>
>> Although, frankly, I've always thought the OSMF ban was more of a
>> don't-ask-don't-tell one. And I guess now that my contributions are
>> going to be deleted anyway I can come clean. I've been tra
On 1/28/11 12:03 PM, Anthony wrote:
Although, frankly, I've always thought the OSMF ban was more of a
don't-ask-don't-tell one. And I guess now that my contributions are
going to be deleted anyway I can come clean. I've been tracing from
Google maps for pretty much the entire time I've been co
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Richard Welty wrote:
> On 1/28/11 10:08 AM, Anthony wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Anthony wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't see any legal argument on that page. Perhaps you got the link
>>> wrong and you meant http://www.systemed.net/blog/?p=100 ?
>>
>> In
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 8:10 AM, Anthony wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 2:59 AM, Frederik Ramm
> wrote:
> > Yes. It is certainly a problematic case but I am absolutely sure that the
> > overwhelming use of Google in JOSM is to trace from it, compared to a
> > negligible amount of non-copyright
OSM has permission to use imagery from Yahoo and Bing for tracing. We don't
have such permission from Google, so if people trace from Google to add data
to OSM, this will create problems in the future.
Why can't we be happy with what we do have? I'm a very happy camper since MS
decided to do let u
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 2:59 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Yes. It is certainly a problematic case but I am absolutely sure that the
> overwhelming use of Google in JOSM is to trace from it, compared to a
> negligible amount of non-copyright-infringing use.
What argument do you have that tracing Goo
Damn, missed Richards mail :/
But as you might see I'm not a friend of telling people what to do and
what not. But I understand your missgivings and if it's clearly visible
(a warning message instead of a silent tag or malfunction) I would be ok.
Matthias
Hi,
On 01/28/11 09:57, Matthias Meißer wrote:
But as said by others this is just wrong. Yes we add a new barrier but
we all know that they could be bypassed by anyone with low skills.
I beg to differ. This is exactly the point of this barrier - you should
not be able to use Google if you have
Hi Frederik,
Am 28.01.2011 08:59, schrieb Frederik Ramm:
Right. And by disallowing Google tiles, we make sure that the wrong
users - those who want to trace from Google - don't use JOSM ;)
But as said by others this is just wrong. Yes we add a new barrier but
we all know that they could be b
Hi,
On 01/28/11 08:43, Maria Arias de Reyna wrote:
It is not necessarily but I, for instance, use JOSM for other purposes more
than tracing OSM. And, sometimes, I use *legitimately* the Google data with my
own data.
As Andrzej has pointed out, you are probably *not*; the way Google tiles
are
El Friday 28 January 2011, Frederik Ramm escribió:
> Ulf Lamping wrote:
> > Reasoning: Using Google or alike to check a GPX trace to be reasonable
> > (e.g. the shape of the track corresponds to the aerial imagery)
>
> But then again, there are myriad tools out there that can be used for
> exac
On 28 January 2011 00:53, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> I understand that there will be a tiny fraction of users negatively affected
> by this,
Actually are there legitimate uses of Google tiles in JOSM that don't
violate the google maps TOS? I wonder because for Yahoo!, it was only
possible to legitim
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Anthony wrote:
> At the very least allow people to use whatever imagery that they want
> when they're using non-openstreetmap servers.
Better yet, just send the user-agent JOSM with every request. Let
Google decide whether or not to block access.
Any blacklist
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 6:53 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> I understand that there will be a tiny fraction of users negatively affected
> by this, but I think it is necessary. We've witnessed a growing number of
> "Google violations" in the past year and I would not want JOSM's reputation
> to be tai
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 4:26 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> JOSM devs,
>
> with the templated TMS layer it is now trivial to display Google
> aerial imagery or Google maps as a background in JOSM. Doing so might
> violate Google's terms of use already (I am unsure but I guess that
> using their tile
Matthias Meißer writes:
> Now with Bing there is a good alternative, so only a few 'hardliners'
> would like to do so, to make the current "ultimate" map of their area,
> with fresh material. I guess this guys are able to setup a proxy to do
> so. It's IMHO not on us to make sure that they use th
Hi,
Ulf Lamping wrote:
Reasoning: Using Google or alike to check a GPX trace to be reasonable
(e.g. the shape of the track corresponds to the aerial imagery)
But then again, there are myriad tools out there that can be used for
exactly that. Google Earth, for example. I agree with you that t
Am 27.01.2011 12:20, schrieb Frederik Ramm:
Given what Richard said - that there will be people who don't give a
shit for such a warning and will trace from Google nonetheless; people
who will write diary entries and forum articles about how they traced
from Google and how easy it is to set up JO
On Thu, 27 Jan 2011 21:20:10 +1100, Andrew Harvey wrote:
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 8:26 PM, Frederik Ramm
wrote:
Another option that we could think about is setting certain tags on
the
uploaded changeset that indicate what background layers were used
(e.g.
source:tile-url=blah.google.com/blah/bl
+1 for the blacklist (for the reasons explained by Richard)
-1 for tagging the changeset (privacy and who is going to watch the tag and
contact people ?)
-1 for comparing. I know already two web sites displaying gm and OSM
mashups. I don't see the advantage of comparing within an editor excepted
Hi,
On 01/27/11 10:53, Timo Juhani Lindfors wrote:
I'd just show a visible warning instead of having JOSM completely
refuse.
Given what Richard said - that there will be people who don't give a
shit for such a warning and will trace from Google nonetheless; people
who will write diary entrie
2011/1/27 Frederik Ramm :
> violate Google's terms of use already (I am unsure but I guess that
> using their tiles without a Google logo is not OK)
+1, I guess so too.
; but of course using
> their data for anything to do with OSM is a big No-No.
well, comparing should be OK (but in many are
Stefan wrote:
> Judging by the amount of “I've just used google maps to ..."
> diary posts on osm.org this *will* lead to trouble otherwise.
Yep.
Potlatch 1 always checked for the presence of 'google' in the tile URL and
refused to display the tile if so. When Potlatch 2 was first released, we
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 8:26 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Another option that we could think about is setting certain tags on the
> uploaded changeset that indicate what background layers were used (e.g.
> source:tile-url=blah.google.com/blah/blah). We could inform users of our
> doing so but disall
What about a big red must-read dialog box when using google? Nannying may be
bad, but providing information isn't.
Judging by the amount of “I've just used google maps to ..." diary posts on
osm.org this *will* lead to trouble otherwise.
"Frederik Ramm" schrieb:
>JOSM devs,
>
>with the
I agree that this isn't a good way to deal with the problem.
Now with Bing there is a good alternative, so only a few 'hardliners'
would like to do so, to make the current "ultimate" map of their area,
with fresh material. I guess this guys are able to setup a proxy to do
so. It's IMHO not on
Frederik Ramm writes:
> I wonder if we should thus build a blacklist into the Imagery layer so
> that it will refuse to use certain tile or WMS URLs. Potlatch already
> does this.
I'd just show a visible warning instead of having JOSM completely
refuse.
El Thursday 27 January 2011, Frederik Ramm escribió:
> Opinions on the whole thing? Problem is, if it is too easy to load
> Google backgrounds, we (as a project) could be accused of knowingly
> inviting tracing from Google.
I don't think this is a good idea. The technology is not bad, what is bad
JOSM devs,
with the templated TMS layer it is now trivial to display Google
aerial imagery or Google maps as a background in JOSM. Doing so might
violate Google's terms of use already (I am unsure but I guess that
using their tiles without a Google logo is not OK); but of course using
their da
29 matches
Mail list logo
