[Imports] NavAds fuel stations import, take 3

[Levente Juhász]

Of course I am no expert, nor part of the DWG but here are my 2 cents:

I think the ToS should be applied to the mapping process itself, not only
to the data product that is uploaded to OSM. So in this case even though
there are no derived products from GSV as in new POIs added to OSM or
changed geometries or tags, the process is still based on GSV. In other
words, if a decision wheter or not to import points is potentially based on
a data source that we can't legally use, the workflow is already tainted.
It should not matter whether the process results in new geometries and
physical tags derived from GSV imagery (that's a pretty clear case). When
using GSV on the validator site, you inevitably check POIs against the
imagery, and therefore even those POIs you keep are potentially kept based
on the fact "that they are visible on GSV". Even if you don't make any
other changes you decided to keep them based on a data source that can't be
used for that. This, in my book violates both OSM's and Google's data
policies. Therefore, I wouldn't use anything on OSM that's an outcome of a
tainted mapping process. In this tricky case, one of the outcomes is "not
mapping something on OSM".

I think this is what Andy meant. So it's really about not using GSV at all,
even if it's for deciding what NOT to put on OSM.

Cheers,
Levente

On Sun, May 6, 2018, 09:19 Ilya Zverev <ilya at zverev.info> wrote:

> Thank you DWG for tracking the state of the imports validator.
>
> I am well aware that none of you want to have any imports to OSM. Even
> when every point is manually checked against knowledge and photos. But
> this issue is about licensing, and I want you to elaborate on that.
>
> As you know, the imports validator is no editor. The data is supplied by
> a third party along with a full permission to use the data. Any input in
> the validator only restricts which features and their attributes are NOT
> imported.
>
> And here you, on behalf on the entire DWG, are saying you cannot take
> decisions to NOT map something in OSM if it's not on Google Street View.
> Could you please explain, why the DWG considers it a terms violation?
> Are there any other previously unknown restrictions we don't know about?
> Like, that we should map only things that are missing on google maps, or
> such?
>
> Ilya
>
> 05.05.2018 20:34, Andy Townsend пишет:
> > On 28/03/2018 21:17, Ilya Zverev wrote:
> >>
> >> Please take another look at the import.
> >
> > It has recently been brought to the DWG's attention that the North
> > American part of this import (at the very least)
> > http://audit.osmz.ru/project/navads_fuel_na is using Google Street View
> > as a source (see screenshot at
> > https://map.atownsend.org.uk/tmp/screens_20180504_01002.png ).
> >
> > Presumably this means that _none_ of this data can now be imported into
> OSM.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Imports mailing list
> > Imports at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Imports mailing list
> Imports at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/imports/attachments/20180506/cd1e97f8/attachment.html>