Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Copy information from official business website (WAS: Proposal for a revision of JA:Available Data)
There is fairly limited case law on what constitutes "substantial investment" under the database law. Here is an article discussing a couple of cases where significant investment was rejected, and one where it was accepted (sadly all in the context of sports, not geodata) - https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=ddc63c34-a49f-4876-86d5-aaec83d65ed1 Best, Kathleen On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 1:48 PM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > sent from a phone > > > On 11. Jul 2019, at 20:23, Kathleen Lu wrote: > > > > "Substantial investment" may not be a black and white standard, but it > is a meaningful one. I hypothesize that Tesco would have difficulty proving > "a substantial investment in either the obtaining, verification or > presentation of the contents." (Note that investment in creating/setting > the hours does not count.) > > > It may have come along as sarcasm the way I have written it, but the idea > is actually appealing: significant investment wrt the database could > eventually be dismissed for those databases, which are more or less the > result of some related operation/work, a byproduct, rather than being set > up to gather and analyze data without being required in the operation. The > investment would be the operation, while the db as a byproduct would be > almost “free”. The OpenStreetMap database would still be protected under > perspective, but a lot of databases would not be protected automatically > any more. > > The maps the GIS department releases are definitely requiring a > significant investment, but the lists of streets a municipality releases > would probably not be covered by the sui generis rule because there is not > much specific investment behind such a compilation, it is a byproduct of > their operation as a public administration. Or the post code lists of the > postal service: the effort is not specifically put into the db, they only > have to print what they already know from planning and organizing the > postal service. > > Is there already case law with examples where a claimed significant > investment has been rejected? I would suspect that almost any database > could be seen as having required a lot of investment for the creation and > updates, or not, according to how you put it. > > From a practical point of view I agree I would not be worried about > copying opening hours (or addresses, or phone numbers) from a retail > company’s website, e.g. Tesco. It’s more likely they would pay you for this > than sue you. > > Cheers Martin ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Copy information from official business website (WAS: Proposal for a revision of JA:Available Data)
sent from a phone > On 11. Jul 2019, at 20:23, Kathleen Lu wrote: > > "Substantial investment" may not be a black and white standard, but it is a > meaningful one. I hypothesize that Tesco would have difficulty proving "a > substantial investment in either the obtaining, verification or presentation > of the contents." (Note that investment in creating/setting the hours does > not count.) It may have come along as sarcasm the way I have written it, but the idea is actually appealing: significant investment wrt the database could eventually be dismissed for those databases, which are more or less the result of some related operation/work, a byproduct, rather than being set up to gather and analyze data without being required in the operation. The investment would be the operation, while the db as a byproduct would be almost “free”. The OpenStreetMap database would still be protected under perspective, but a lot of databases would not be protected automatically any more. The maps the GIS department releases are definitely requiring a significant investment, but the lists of streets a municipality releases would probably not be covered by the sui generis rule because there is not much specific investment behind such a compilation, it is a byproduct of their operation as a public administration. Or the post code lists of the postal service: the effort is not specifically put into the db, they only have to print what they already know from planning and organizing the postal service. Is there already case law with examples where a claimed significant investment has been rejected? I would suspect that almost any database could be seen as having required a lot of investment for the creation and updates, or not, according to how you put it. From a practical point of view I agree I would not be worried about copying opening hours (or addresses, or phone numbers) from a retail company’s website, e.g. Tesco. It’s more likely they would pay you for this than sue you. Cheers Martin ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Copy information from official business website (WAS: Proposal for a revision of JA:Available Data)
I understand the inclination to sarcasm, but your second statement is simply not a logical one. A state's records of it's plans to build and maintain roads aren't a map, and a typical map has many things on it other than just roads. The plans by themselves may not be a protected database under EU law, but governments discuss quite publicly the costs and efforts of their GIS departments. "Substantial investment" may not be a black and white standard, but it is a meaningful one. I hypothesize that Tesco would have difficulty proving "a substantial investment in either the obtaining, verification or presentation of the contents." (Note that investment in creating/setting the hours does not count.) Best, Kathleen On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 12:34 PM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > sent from a phone > > > On 10. Jul 2019, at 18:35, Kathleen Lu via legal-talk < > legal-talk@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > > > > I do not think that a retail store chain could successfully argue that > it makes a "substantial investment" in maintaining a list of its own > stores' hours. Since the store sets the hours, the effort of obtaining, > verification, and/or presentation should be fairly trivial. > > > Along the same reasoning you could say: “I do not think that a state makes > a substantial investment in mapping the roads they maintain. Since the > state plans, builds and maintains the roads it should be fairly trivial for > them to make a map.” > > Cheers, Martin ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
