On 22 November 2010 20:13, Ben Kelley <[email protected]> wrote: > > If we get an agreeable licence for the main sources of "non-survey" data > (I'm including at least Nearmap and the Bureau of Statistics data in that - > what about Yahoo?) then this becomes a little more manageable. >
Easiest first. Yahoo aerial imagery is not a problem, data you trace is your own new work and can be licensed as you wish. Mike (of LWG) is working though the AU listed imports on/via http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue , of the imports listed 9 are CC-BY and on further ongoing discussion it seems the attribution may only need to be maintained on the metadata. Only 1 item is CC-BY-SA which is NearMap who have rights over the (contributed) traced data, LWG intend to have further discussion when the revisions to the Contributor Terms have settled down. The BP petrol station data (via MapData Sciences) seems to be licensed only for private use; making it questional if it should have been imported in the first place; follow-up discussion with them is needed. > When so much data is derived this starts to get a lot more difficult. While > mapping the streets of Tamworth (NSW) was pretty much totally survey work, > there are still helpful things like Bureau of Statistics data marking creeks > and rivers. (e.g. Peel river) Is my data totally not derived in this case? > > For walks I surveyed in Scotland, I did also look at the OS map for that > area, so arguably that data is also partly derived. Could this change be > kept, or would it need to be deleted? > Using an OS map (tomtom GPS/satnav etc) to get you around is considered to be fine as long as you are sourcing your own data from being on the ground. Regards Grant _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
