<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:lucida console,sans-serif;font-size:12pt"><div><br>Had an experience yesterday which raises an interesting legal question. Around Easter 2010, IIRC, I surveyed what appeared to be a footpath in good faith: the footpath sign appeared to point down a gravel track across a field. Yesterday, as part of another mapping expedition, I followed said footpath in reverse, partly through memory and partly because again, the sign at the other end appeared to point down it.<br><br>The track led onto a road. About a minute later, I noticed a car come out of the field and follow me down the road; I was then given a hard time by the landowner about trespassing etc. Partly because I was convinced that it was the footpath, or, if it wasn't, the signposts didn't make that clear, and partly because "chasing" someone down a road is rather OTT and petty-minded, IMO, I
argued my case.<br><br>However on returning I looked at the Ordnance Survey map out of curiosity, and found it wasn't the footpath - the footpath actually diverged from the track and cut straight across a field, though the signs were very ambiguous. That said, her reaction did seem very militant in the circumstances, which makes me believe she's someone that could potentially kick up a fuss if said path is on OSM and people are following it - or make walkers vulnerable to a confrontation.<br><br>This does raise a legal dilemma though. Should the path stay in OSM and risk the possible consequences - or should the path be deleted, risking potential OS copyright infringement (as it was the OS that confirmed that the path didn't in fact exist)?<br><br>Thanks,<br>Nick<br></div>
</div></body></html>