[Imports] NavAds fuel stations import, take 3

[Ilya Zverev]

06.05.2018 11:04, Andy Townsend пишет:
>> 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.
> 
> That's simply not true.  Let's think about the process for a second:
> 
> 1) A user of your "validation" site sees an example navads entry. It's
> chosen randomly for them; they will likely have no local knowledge.
> 
> 2) They press the GSV button, see that it's present there, and then
> click "Good" to "validate" it in your import.
> 
> How is this process _not_ using Google Street View to decide which items
> are "good" to import?

I wonder, how did we in our pursuit of copyright purity came from "do 
not copy from google" to "do not even decide what not to map if there is 
a google tab in your browser"?

It IS using GSV for making decisions. But not for taking any data. 
Google does not have copyright on your decisions based on images it 
shows. Thoughts are not copyrightable.

A mapper does not make a decision solely based on google: in the 
validator, they also have four different imagery layer, OSM data and 
data provided by a third-party. GSV is just one of seven sources a 
validator consults to make decisions. You do not know, and it is 
impossible to detect, which one was the decisive one.

Then, one cannot make _any_ data visible on google's photos to be added 
to OSM. All the data is already there. As per Google's TOU cited by Glen:

"No Creating Content From Google Maps Content. Customer will not create 
content based on Google Maps Content, including tracing, digitizing, or 
creating other datasets based on Google Maps Content."

Data imported is not in any way based on google's. It is provided by a 
third-party and filtered by mappers based on several sources. Mappers do 
not trace, digitize or create anything in any other ways based on GSV 
photos. "Good" or "not" decisions cannot be copyrighted.

>> Could you please explain, why the DWG considers it a terms violation? 
> 
> The very first point of
> https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Contributor_Terms is "1. We
> respect the intellectual property rights of others and we need to be
> able to respond to any objections by intellectual property owners. " and
> goes on to explain exactly what that means.
> 
> You're well aware of all this as you've been part of the community long
> enough to understand it (you were even on the OSMF board in 2015/2016).
> It looks like you're simply trying to "pull a fast one" here - adding
> GSV validation to your site, hoping no one who realises that it's a
> problem will notice.

I am not pulling anything. I tolerate the community's opinion on taking 
notes from GSV photos, like count of a building's levels: although I 
think it is okay, some do not, and I do not promote my point of view. 
But taking a look at GSV to check if a POI was there at some point of 
time, and using it to approve or reject a change — I cannot understand 
how is that infringing any copyright.

I respect property rights and I have always wished best for OSM, but the 
kind of blind religious submission here I cannot tolerate.

Ilya