<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2017-05-10 11:58, joost schouppe
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAO2_g7JBYjb1DNgT20Y2FmdXGYSqhqCwSFKJyhVWpyY7EojWuA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div>I guess Glenn’s point is that the license issue
cannot be circumvented, even if the king itself says
something different than its contents.<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>André, could you elaborate the statement that tracing =
consulting? I don't really understand how you come to that
conclusion<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
Rather consulting => tracing.<br>
As opposed to "<b>copier</b>" which is what we would do if we
imported PICC's vector data, "<b>consulter</b>" is accessing the
raster scan images of their Web servers by any means. "Aucune
contrainte d'accès pour la consultation" means that we can do
anything with those images, including what I prompted the SPW to
write in a OSM tailored document when I recalled what we are doing:
"décalquer", "trace", "overtrekken?", something that we learn to do
at the kindergarten together with "picoter": put a sheet of paper on
top of another and draw what is underneath.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAO2_g7JBYjb1DNgT20Y2FmdXGYSqhqCwSFKJyhVWpyY7EojWuA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div>I'm not really sure about this, but I think it could
work if the copyright owner creates some official
documentation explaining that tracing on top of their
imagery is not considered copying. My French isn't good
enough to understand if the mail from geoportail is saying
exactly that. But if anyone thinks it would be possible to
get them to add a clause like this, we could ask
legal-questions if a model like that could work. I don't
think a copy-pasted e-mail is enough though.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
You can ask them to change their site, but I fear that you're
getting a huge problem on your hands because there seems to be no
Web site in the world that speaks of "décalquer". SPW seems to be
the first one to speak correctly, and you would have to ask to do
the same to all the world sites too !!!<br>
I think that if 99,999% of the users will only figure printing the
map or so, the SPW might prefer to not embarrass those users by
speaking of tracing and having to answer what it means. They may
prefer to issue an OSM tailored version.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAO2_g7JBYjb1DNgT20Y2FmdXGYSqhqCwSFKJyhVWpyY7EojWuA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div>> <span style="font-size:12.8px">I made an overpass
turbo script showing OSM with the Michelin's colors.</span></div>
> <span style="font-size:12.8px">I won't show it because
the vigilantes would accuse me to copy Michelin's colors.</span><br
style="font-size:12.8px">
> <span style="font-size:12.8px">While doing so, I
noticed that the main axis Ans-Amercœur wasn't fully
Michelin's colors.</span><br style="font-size:12.8px">
> <span style="font-size:12.8px">So, this could produce
suboptimal routes.</span><br style="font-size:12.8px">
> <span style="font-size:12.8px">This is because a few N3
streets are tagged highway=secondary instead of =primary.</span><br
style="font-size:12.8px">
> <span style="font-size:12.8px">I certainly did not
correct that because the vigilantes would say that it is
copying Michelin.</span>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I'm still of the opinion that we cannot use Michelin to
validate our own map. But here you're talking about using
the coloring of OSM roads to look for strange situations.
That is obviously OK. If you really want to do that in
Michelin style colors because that's what you like to see,
I don't think anyone could be against that (though
copyright holders sometimes think in strange ways). <br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
For one thing, speaking of colors was a joke but it seems that it
unwillingly proved how picky copyright matters can be.<br>
First, if anything in copyrights is precise, it seems necessary to
clarify what you mean by "validate our map".<br>
Second, please let Michelin themselves decide what they allow.<br>
My impression from their reply is that they just don't mind.<br>
And, if you find it necessary, please add this note to those
secondary streets: It is forbidden to change these National roads to
primary because someone once notices that they are so on a Michelin
map.<br>
<br>
Happy mapping,<br>
Cordialement,
<br>
Amitiés,
<br>
<br>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>André.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>