<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2013-12-06 09:09, Wouter Hamelinck
wrote :<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAOkJ8mo8VVKbF60zpnmONYPkPxkvAdFyM=1SW2PF-R4EfTGPHA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I wrote several times without reaction that the law states that the law (e.g. the Moniteur) cannot be copyrighted, that the boundaries are part of the law (normally in the Moniteur) and hence that the boundaries cannot be copyrighted. The same applies to road signs.
Don't you agree?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
OK, I'll bite.
- If it is not in the Moniteur/Staatsblad it is definitely not a law.
(reaction to the use of "e.g." and "normally")
- Yes, you can use the Staatsblad/Moniteur to map things. Not sure how
you would do that.
- I am interested to know to which laws you are referring. Especially
the ones that define the boundaries. I've never found those.</pre>
</blockquote>
We have had a discussion that the change that is going to happen to
the border between Belgium and Netherlands WILL be published in the
M/S WITH the coordinates or equivalent (otherwise it would be
meaningless). We wrote that if the equivalent data for the other
boundaries is not easy or impossible to find in the M/S it's because
they date from times when computers did not exist (sorry, I'm late
sending this and if I'm duplicating what others write).<br>
BTW, you can't extract computer from a plain PDF document; they're
made to be printed.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAOkJ8mo8VVKbF60zpnmONYPkPxkvAdFyM=1SW2PF-R4EfTGPHA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">- This does NOT imply that something contafining
boundaries is by
definition not copyrightable. The colors black and white can not
be
copyrighted. This does not imply that any black and white
photograph
can't be copyrighted. In our case, if someone makes his own
representation of the boundaries (e.g. a digitization), that is
definitely copyrighted.</blockquote>
This is not about copyrighting the dot. This is about copyrighting
where dots are. Digitize what? The definition of a boundary is
already digits. That is public information and it must be publicly
available. Anyone copying public data from such a government
publication cannot disallow copying it further, but the rest yes,
that's what "copyrighting the law" means.<br>
How could you track them with a GPS anyway?<br>
Where does all the data of the OSM boundaries of the world come
from?<br>
There is a map overlaying SPW and OSM maps. The borderlines were
duplicated. SPW simply removed theirs, no complaint about ours, they
seemed to find them perfectly normal.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAOkJ8mo8VVKbF60zpnmONYPkPxkvAdFyM=1SW2PF-R4EfTGPHA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">- Road signs can not be copyrighted. OK, that means
that you can draw
one without getting sued for it. Not sure what it has to do with
mapping.
</blockquote>
Just like copyrighting the dot, this is not about copyrighting the
form of the signals.<br>
It has to do with mapping where the signs are (on the road, need I
say).<br>
If we see a map or photograph showing road signs, we can use their
position for OSM but not copy the whole map or photograph. Only the
artwork can be copyrighted.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>André.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>