[OSM-legal-talk] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM layer into Adobe Illustrator?

[Robert (Jamie) Munro]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

rob at robmyers.org wrote:
> Quoting Richard Fairhurst <richard at systemeD.net>:
> 
>> You can use GPLed software to produce your own copyrighted works. If
>> you draw a map with (say) Inkscape, which is copyleft, there's nothing
>> to require that your map should be copyleft.
> 
> You can make a non-GPL map with Inkscape because the map is not a 
> derivative of Inkscape's source code.
[snip a whole bunch of explanation]

Yes. You're just agreeing with Richard's statement of facts, but
expressing it in a way that sounds like you are trying to disagree with
him. The facts are not in dispute. What is in dispute is whether we
/should/ allow more use of the data than we currently do.

> So the example of drawing a map using Inkscape is not instructive.

But it is. Because the point of both OSM and Inkscape is to allow people
to draw maps (and in the case of Inkscape, draw things other than maps).
But maps drawn with Inkscape can be used for any purpose. Maps drawn
with OSM cannot. Richard (and I) both think that this is a bad situation.

I work for a design company that designs the signs at a University. Some
of these are big maps of the campus.

What is the point in me adding data to OSM when I can't then use other
data for my work. I'm much better off just forking OSM's code base and
starting with an empty data set. I can then add the University and it's
surrounding streets from scratch, in the knowledge that I won't have any
problems displaying this data. I could let people fix any mistakes I
have made so that next time the signs are replaced they are correct. I
could even let people add streets from other parts of the world.

>> If you
>> draw a map with OSM data, which is also copyleft, your whole map is
>> required to be copyleft.
> 
> Assuming that OSM data can be copylefted.

Well that's a whole other discussion. We'll assume that it is, at least
in some jurisdictions, otherwise we already /are/ a PD map. If you can
prove that, then I'll shut up and make more maps.

> But since anyone else can regenerate the map using OSM's own tools, 
> there is no commercial advantage to making your map proprietary.

If your map is part of a book about cycle routes around the UK, there is
a commercial advantage in having your book proprietary, even though it
uses OSM maps. If I had published that book, I would be more than happy
to add a few missing cycle paths to OSM's central data.

> Unless you are trying to deny value to the community by making a proprietary
> derivative.

How does a proprietary derivative "deny value to the community"? Would
it deny any more or less value to the community if it was instead based
on non-OSM data (which it currently may have to be)? I have no problem
crediting OSM for it's data in commercial projects. I just have a
problem with having to release all my associated work under the CC-BY-SA
license (in fact, I don't have a problem with that, but my clients do,
which means I don't get paid, which means I don't make maps, which means
OSM gets less data).

> In which case I'm not sure how this is good for OSM.

OSM is supposed to be good for the world, not the other way around.

[snip]
>> - Works well in ITN-type cases.
> 
> If ITN are unclear about either the license or broadcast law then I am 
> happy to
> talk to them. I have consulted on broadcast projects before. IANAL, though.

Pretend we are them. They said "Our lawyers looked at this and aren't
sure that we can use it because we don't know what reasonable
attribution means, and we can't share-alike the whole news, or even just
the part of it that has the map in shot." What would you say?

Robert (Jamie) Munro
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFF5BsJz+aYVHdncI0RAkzaAJwLBD3mXJLJqL5Q7golTvPkKNBQOgCgi0Zt
b56q96Wn4A6ssC/Rm3CU2+o=
=gzTN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----