[Legal-general] [Geowanking] Flickrs WOE stuff

[Eric Wolf]

Steve...


> So.... ignoring the lack of OSM attribution on the OSM map (hint
> hint :-)
>

They do attribute OSM at the bottom of the page when they talk about
Baghdad. Of course, they sort of have to because OSM has the best digital
map of Baghdad on the planet.


> Aren't these polygons just vast derivative works of either OSM or
> TeleAtlas/NavTeq data? All those geocoded photos that were just placed
> on a map... derive the places from the map, right? Then if you derive
> the polygons from that set of points.. the polygons are just derived
> from the map. I thought those guys dont like you deriving polygonal
> datasets without paying them extra beer tokens?
>

You could argue at all of the points owe beer tokens to the US Military for
flying the GPS birds. Or you could go back even further and nod to the likes
of Copernicus... One of the tribulations of geospatial data is it's
ontological nature. All geospatial data attempts to represent stuff in the
real world. Common representations of real stuff are generally referred to
as "facts". The only way for geospatial data creators to hang onto their
copyright is to break this ontology - by either presenting the facts in a
manner thats non-interoperable (like a really  wanky datum) or by
introducing "facts" that don't actually exist. The latter is the normal
approach (phone books including fake phone numbers, maps including fake
streets, etc.).

So I think the end result is that, unless someone managed to geotag a photo
with a non-real "fact", there can be no licensing issue. And unlike some
copyleft schemes, derivative works utilizing what can be assumed "factual"
in the source work would be considered original. So the geolocations derived
from copyrighted works presented as databases of "facts" would be considered
facts. And creating polygons based on those facts would not be impacted by
the original copyright.

What would be REALLY cool is if someone mocked up photos of some of the fake
streets in the TeleAtlas data, posted them to Flickr and geotagged them as
"photos of this fake place".


> attitude, I really do... but if you guys are doing it, does that mean
> we can do it too? Please?
>

Personally, I think OSM can and should draw more on existing maps and data.
I find it very admirable that you put so much effort into telling people
"don't use an existing map". I assume the strictness of the rule really
derives from the structure of the OSM database. It really, really needs some
kind of editorial control and vetting process. As beautiful as it is, it's
really teetering on the possibility of wide-spread corruption.

Of course, I'm also one of the first paleo-geos arguing for the openness of
OSM. Talk about beautiful - an "map" almost entirely devoid of centralized
direction and purpose.


> Unless I've missed something and in fact all those images are EXIF
> geotagged from raw GPS?
>

And if they're geotagged from GPS, does the US Military get a bunch of beer
tokens?

In only the greatest admiration,
-Eric

-- 
-=--=---=----=----=---=--=-=--=---=----=---=--=-=-
Eric B. Wolf                          720-209-6818
USGS Geographer
Center of Excellence in GIScience
PhD Student
CU-Boulder - Geography
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-general/attachments/20081106/dcaa165b/attachment.html>