On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 9:25 PM, andrzej zaborowski <[email protected]> wrote: > On 1 September 2010 17:40, Anthony <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 8:59 AM, Niklas Cholmkvist <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> Someone wrote: >>>> take the coordinates from Google >>>> Earth/Maps. >>> I will not. That is a non-free source, the same reason I do not >>> look/consider Wikimapia(google maps based) or any other proprietary >>> maps. >>> OSM may currently be the freest data collection that exists (since >>> CC-BY-SA-3.0 is legally invalid for OSM data according to Creative >>> Commons) >> >> If OSM data is PD, then so is Google data. > > I think the correct term is it's not protected by copyright, not sure > about PD. But it may be protected by something else, like a contract.
Contracts can and do "protect" works that are public domain. Just because it's "protected" by a contract, that doesn't mean it's not public domain. I'd say PD is the right term. > So even if it was PD you can't make use of this fact because as soon > as you visit google.com you may be bound by a contract. If you use it > without being bound by a contract then (at least in theory) you > probably are taking advantage of someone breaching their contract with > google. (that's my understanding anyway) There's nothing illegal about "taking advantage of someone breaching their contract". There's "tortious interference", but that requires that you *induced* the breach, not merely took advantage of it. Actually, in most jurisdictions, including mine, there's nothing "illegal" (tortious or criminal) about breaching a contract with Google either. Besides, there's nothing in the Google Terms of Service which says "you may not make use of the facts you learn by using this website". That'd just be silly. Not to mention unconscionable, and therefore unenforcible. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
