<div dir="auto"><div dir="auto">Hi Andy,</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I feel for you. It is a difficult task, and whatever the DWG decides is fine by me.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Anyone trying to actually enforce copyright infringement due to someone being influenced by what they've seen, rather than what they've directly copied/traced, is going to be hard-pressed to get a result. But, we must continue to maintain our high standards.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">- Jez</div><div dir="auto"></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, 18 Apr 2022, 12:46 Andy Townsend, <<a href="mailto:ajt1047@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">ajt1047@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hello - especially to mappers in London. Andy from OSM's Data Working <br>
Group here.<br>
<br>
There's been a suggestion that mapper that has been very active in West <br>
London* <a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mikhail1412" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mikhail1412</a> has been using <br>
various sources that aren't compatible with OSM. Attempts to contact the <br>
mapper via <br>
<a href="http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=2055614" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=2055614</a> have <br>
mostly been unsuccessful, although a local mapper has managed to get <br>
replies to some private messages (which unfortunately do also suggest <br>
that they're using incompatible sources). It has been suggested that <br>
<a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mik1412" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mik1412</a> is another account by the <br>
same person.<br>
<br>
Attempts by the DWG to get the mapper to interact with the community <br>
have failed: <a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mikhail1412/blocks" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mikhail1412/blocks</a> , <br>
hence a "block until they engage with us" message at <br>
<a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5919" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5919</a> .<br>
<br>
I had hoped that we'd be able to revert and redact certain classes of <br>
data only (see e.g. comment on <br>
<a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/113072980" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/113072980</a> ). However, the <br>
problematic changes include geometric changes too - it has been said <br>
that the latest change to <a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/144667839" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/144667839</a> <br>
(see the top-right corner of <br>
<a href="https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=113007152" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=113007152</a> ) isn't possible <br>
based on imagery available to OSM because of tree cover. That edit is <br>
unlikely to be based on survey as the mapper concerned apparently hasn't <br>
been in London since late 2019 (due to the pandemic etc.). Some other <br>
changes seem to match Google Street View and not a more recent survey.<br>
<br>
It therefore looks like we'll have to revert (and likely redact) most or <br>
all of this mapper's changes since the beginning of 2020, unless we get <br>
a reason not to from a reply to <br>
<a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5919" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5919</a> . I'm sending this <br>
message for a few reasons:<br>
<br>
* to encourage mappers in West London to comment on this user's <br>
changesets, both where the data appears not to be based on sources <br>
available to OSM but also where it can be validated by e.g. survey. I <br>
don't expect that you'll get a reply, but those comments will be <br>
extremely useful to us and to everyone else in the area.<br>
<br>
* to give everyone a chance to tell me if I've got anything wrong <br>
(please reply on this list if that's the case).<br>
<br>
* to give everyone a bit of a warning of a potential "hole" appearing in <br>
the data in West London in a few days time.<br>
<br>
I won't start any wide-scale revert for a week or so to give the mapper <br>
concerned yet another chance to reply. I have already reverted (and <br>
redacted) some changes in <br>
<a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/115296538" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/115296538</a> where there were <br>
specific reports about individual pieces of data.<br>
<br>
Best Regards,<br>
<br>
Andy<br>
<br>
* more recently the same mapper has been active in France - I've also <br>
asked them for the sources of their edits there.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Talk-GB mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div>