You guys would be surprised how good the relationship between a lot of SEA mappers and Google is. 
I don’t know “SEA.” I’m guessing “SE” is Search Engine, but…
Southeast Asia. Google Maps is very popular there. In the past, I’ve sometimes struggled to convince even open-source enthusiasts from the region that open map data is a worthwhile endeavor compared to staying within the Google Maps ecosystem.
2 Likes
Just to be clear, I’m not referring to fair use here. This is about the merger doctrine and perhaps the threshold of originality. Though the merger doctrine also comes from the American legal system, OSM apparently relies on it very heavily. If not for these doctrines or similar, even visiting a shop in person to record its signposted address or opening hours would run afoul of the shopkeeper’s copyright!
Copying details from a copyrighted map would be far riskier because it would be harder to claim that only the underlying idea has been copied, as opposed to its creative expression in map form. Also, if a map is considered an edited compilation, then systematically copying many details from it would also be problematic.
I agree about the need to avoid contamination, although the overall message should be that it’s unnecessary to take shortcuts. There are legitimate alternatives – complementary to in-person surveys – that result in something higher in quality and better differentiated than copying from another map. If we take an overly cautious approach that stigmatizes armchair mapping, for instance, we could fall short in coverage, causing the prospective data consumer to second-guess OSM and leave us in the same position.
2 Likes
Neither. Individual facts are not protected (in any legal system I know of) by copyright or similar statutes and in these situations they are not a constituent element of a larger whole that would be protected by classical creative copyright, database rights or similar either. The largish exception to this are data protection statutes which in some legislation can protect data of legal entities (and which has been called on to get entries removed from OSM).
Note to Team Whatabout: yes it is possible to construct situations which run afoul of above assumptions, but there is always a lot of uninteresting grey area in such things.
9 Likes
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/what-is-considered-stealing-from-other-maps/97623/27
I agree What Colour is not “easy to digest,” though I did find it an enjoyable read about how computer / data scientists bump up against how things are “looked at” from a legal perspective.
The example I gave about ACA’s (private, proprietary, copyrighted) routes having a small fraction of these routes “sneak into” OSM (contrasted with very public USBRs we work on together to get into OSM) was more about how when two parties (ACA and OSM) find what might be a contentious copyright dispute (OSM potentially “stealing from other maps”), the actual facts (innocent Fair Use) persuaded both parties there shouldn’t be any dispute at all. Well, without the fireworks of litigation or the forcing of data to be redacted from OSM, anyway.
As I described these “couple of routes” (pieces of the Underground Railroad and Transamerica Trail bicycle routes, ACA’s intellectual property) as “holding together the spine of the skeleton we are using to launch ACA’s public efforts at national bike routes” (building the USBRS in OSM), ACA saw the wisdom in essentially abdicating a defense of their copyright on this relatively minor amount of their property. And even justified this somewhat publicly with their “a small amount of this is bound to happen.” It was effectively seen as and agreed to be a leverage of one set of assets (likely producing less of an ACA revenue stream, as the data are in OSM) becoming another set of assets shared by the achievement of an important ACA long-term goal, the continuing development of the USBRS. (Quite successfully over the last decade or so).
It might be subtle, or complicated, or both, but it is an example of how what might be perceived as “stealing from other maps” was actually “not really (in this case), and here’s how.” And, it’s been a big “win-win” (for ACA and OSM) that we did. Apologies if it seems I’m talking this into a muddy ditch.
If you steal, make sure you’re not caught.
If you copy coordinate from somewhere and they’re wrong, you’re caught.
You don’t need to go there, if one of us already went, you can crosscheck if the coordinates are right here Mapillary cookie policy use
If instead of mapillary, you have used today’s facebook post, we don’t need to know. Just make sure there’s no mistake that could trace back to the source.
1 Like
Typically I have been there, wherever there is but I didn’t get it marked at the moment. I would never try to map someplace I have never been to.
1 Like
This is a completely irresponsible posting. OSM is not about “we don’t need to know” and “make sure you’re not caught”. It is about not copying. Copyright infringement is still infringement even if no one sees you.
9 Likes
If you cannot prove I have stolen, then I have not stolen. As simple as that.
1 Like
Read again my posts, I said IF.
That is just an “asking for a friend”,.
…which is no proof either, I have several times asked for friends.
I will not continue. Take me to court.
1 Like
You are confused.
We don’t have any rights in the material you copied from, so we wouldn’t have standing to take you to court for starters. But we will remove everything that you copied and if you don’t cooperate that could well be everything.
3 Likes
Guys, it is time to quit with this dialog, my initial question was answered quite completely. Problem solved!
4 Likes
When we’ll see 13 years of work (including street names, building numbers, and other basic stuff) being vandalized, is your post enough proof you did it? Watch 12 angry men if you haven’t already.
If the owners of the material sue osm, and you see my username editing it, I will take the full responsibility. I’m easy to find.
I don’t understand the reason for taking an adversarial stance toward fellow OSM contributors. Like any wiki-style project, we depend on an honor code and some level of trust. If you’re saying that someone should presume your innocence if they can’t prove you violated any copyright, that’s one thing. But plagiarism is unethical and this project frowns upon it, regardless of whether the contributor or project gets in trouble for it, so encouraging that behavior here is naturally going to receive pushback.
5 Likes
Actually, in OSM it is less destructive to be caught early.
We already had cases of data for entire cities being eradicated and deleted because some silly person added stolen road data. Once spotted clean revert was impossible - so also all later related honest edits were lost in this area.
8 Likes
The contributor terms assume good faith and the overwhelming majority of contributions are made on that founding, but which edits to OSM data are retained and distributed is entirely elective.
If somebody calls their own contributions in to doubt and violates that assumption of good faith, then there is no need for longish investigations or a need to prove anything, then we can and should simply stop distributing those contributions. This is different than a mapper being reported were fairness dictates that the facts are investigated as far as possible before action, if necessary, is taken.
3 Likes
I clearly stated that contributors should not be caught doing something illegal, (this would compromise the entire project).
I clearly stated that I don’t want to know other contributors illegal activities like copying facebook content, (such a knowledge would make me an accomplice in most jurisdictions).
@SimonPoole you just admitted of deleting 18000+ changesets, and now it’s your work which is in doubt, not mine. I’m one of the most active contributors and my local community knows me and trusts me.
If you’re so sure of yourself, I challenge you to tell us for which changeset I have infringed any proprietary rights, and I’ll be more than happy to answer where did I get the data from.
@all (including me) We should use “copying” not “stealing”. It’s not the same thing. “Copying” means the original is still in place.
Imagine your car being stolen and still being there the next morning.
2 Likes