<div dir="ltr">Thank you. <div><br></div><div>If the employer is to give permission, do we have a way of capturing that somehow? Is there a repository of PDFd emails authorising such things, for example?<div><br></div><div>On the Talk-GB list it was suggested an organisation should create a corporate account, but I don't know that that's any different from a regular account and so I don't know whether it says clearly that the employer (i.e., a corporate person) has opened the account, rather than it being a 'personal' account of an individual employee (but whether <i>qua </i>employee on behalf of the organisation or <i>qua </i>private individual, we can't tell).</div><div><br></div><div>If the situation I have in mind goes to the scale it could, then I'm wondering if it's safer to have a subscription service at £10 per year with a very basic support portal for this network of (loosely speaking) "federated" employers, with special support material for their special mapping needs. It could be totally minimal, but provide an 'excuse' to get an unambiguous corporate contributor agreement.</div><div><br></div><div>Sorry I can't be more specific at this stage about which employers I have in mind, but if any thoughts can be usefully offered at this stage gladly received. </div><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div><br></div><div>Edward</div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, 19 Oct 2019 at 11:16, Simon Poole <<a href="mailto:simon@poole.ch">simon@poole.ch</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<p>If it was outside of the UK it is very unlikely that the edits by
the employee would be considered anything protectable outside of
them adding a substantial extract of data from a database that is
protected by EU database regulation. <br>
</p>
<p>In the UK however I suppose there is a chance of the edits,
assuming they are not totally trivial, being a copyrightable work,
which would potentially require us to remove them if in the end
they were not available on terms that are compatible with the
ODbL. If they don't amount to that I don't see any recourse of the
employer wrt the data being in OSM.</p>
<p>That said, -don't use OSM behind the back of the employer-, get
upfront permission to use OSM.</p>
<p>Simon<br>
</p>
<div>Am 19.10.2019 um 10:12 schrieb Edward
Bainton:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Ah and perhaps we should distinguish between the
employee whose manager says, "Put this into OSM" and the
employee who thinks, "My employer doesn't care how I get the job
done, so hang this proprietary GIS she's given me, my job is so
much easier on OSM and she'll thank me for using it."</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, 19 Oct 2019 at 09:07,
Edward Bainton <<a href="mailto:bainton.ete@gmail.com" target="_blank">bainton.ete@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">Thank you both. To clarify, this is in the UK,
where I am in discussion with two organisations.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>From a purely legal perspective, can I simply plough on
trying to invest them in the usefulness of OSM on the
basis that, if any employer became unhappy, their remedy
is against their employee for signing the Contributor
Agreement without authorisation - anIf it was d not
against OSM, which can keep the data?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In other words, if later becomes a problem, it's not
OSM's problem.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Obviously, good practice may dictate a less "not my
problem" approach, but I'm trying to find the worst-case
scenario before going further.<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, 19 Oct 2019 at
00:06, Kathleen Lu <<a href="mailto:kathleen.lu@mapbox.com" target="_blank">kathleen.lu@mapbox.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Jurisdiction dependant, but here are two general
concepts which I think are relevant:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>As the statute you quoted specifies, when
copyright will belong to the employer, it tends to
depend on if the copyrightable work was made within
the scope of the employee's job. (If you're a
software programmer, it would be difficult for your
employer to claim ownership a romance novel you
write, but easier to claim ownership of code you
write.)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>When an employee signs a contract, whether that
contract is binding on the employer depends on
whether the employee had authorization to sign on
behalf of the employer, and sometimes whether it
*seems* like to a reasonably objective person
dealing with the employee whether the employee had
authorization. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>These two principles would be in tension with
each other in the case of an employer who claimed,
on the one hand, that their employee's job was to
edit OSM, but on the other hand, the employee did
not have authorization to sign the Contributor
Agreement, which would have been required for them
to do their job. <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thus, while it would be easy for an employer to
claim ownership of such edits, I think it would be
difficult for that same employer to also claim the
Contributor Agreement does not apply. <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-Kathleen<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Oct 18, 2019
at 3:04 PM Simon Poole <<a href="mailto:simon@poole.ch" target="_blank">simon@poole.ch</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>The question is rather complicated and if at
all can really only be approached on a per
jurisdiction base as both employment regulation
and certain aspects of intellectual property law
differ widely by territory.<br>
<br>
So the 1st thing to clarify would be where this is
taking place and which law is relevant.<br>
<br>
Simon<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">Am 18. Oktober 2019
19:41:59 MESZ schrieb Edward Bainton <<a href="mailto:bainton.ete@gmail.com" target="_blank">bainton.ete@gmail.com</a>>:
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">Hi all
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Quick question arising from a
'lobbying' conversation: </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><b>If an employee edits the map in the
course of their employment, has the work
been adequately licensed to OSM/the big
wide Open?</b></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>According to UK Copyright Act 1988, </div>
<div><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:arial,helvetica,verdana,sans-serif;font-size:12px;text-align:justify">s.
11 (2) Where a literary, dramatic,
musical or artistic work </span><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,verdana,sans-serif;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-weight:bolder;font-size:1.4em;text-align:justify">[</span><a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/section/11#commentary-c13754611" title="View the commentary text for this
item" id="gmail-m_4447884798046814902gmail-m_6246177448856213512gmail-m_6231068875820811635gmail-m_-8027215523285295652gmail-m_2702516656846790668gmail-reference-c13754611" style="color:rgb(39,144,196);line-height:1.4em;text-decoration-line:none;font-family:arial,helvetica,verdana,sans-serif;font-size:12px;vertical-align:top;font-weight:bold;padding:0px 0.1em;text-align:justify" target="_blank">F1</a><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,verdana,sans-serif;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-size:12px;text-align:justify">,
or a film,</span><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,verdana,sans-serif;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-weight:bolder;font-size:1.4em;text-align:justify">]</span><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:arial,helvetica,verdana,sans-serif;font-size:12px;text-align:justify"> is
made by an employee in the course of his
employment, his employer is the first
owner of any copyright in the work
subject to any agreement to the
contrary.</span><br>
</div>
<div> <br>
</div>
<div>Can the employee be regarded, as far as
OSM is concerned, as having authority to
license the work? Or rather, which is what
I take to be the more important question,
if the employer became unhappy with OSM
using their employee's edits, would her
remedy be against OSM, or against her
employee? </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks!</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
-- <br>
Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem
Android-Mobiltelefon mit Kaiten Mail gesendet.</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
legal-talk mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:legal-talk@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">legal-talk@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<pre>_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
<a href="mailto:legal-talk@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">legal-talk@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
legal-talk mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:legal-talk@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">legal-talk@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk</a><br>
</blockquote></div>