[OSM-legal-talk] Deconstructing the "loss of data" claim
Frederik Ramm
frederik at remote.org
Wed Feb 20 16:28:34 GMT 2008
Hi,
> We can never exclude that kind of thing. Person X is fed up
> about traffic passing his house : just delete that road on
> OSM.
Correct. We can also never exclude someone copying map data from
Google. It's a matter of what stance we, as a project, take, and as
long as everybody agrees that willfully entering false data is a bad
thing that should be corrected if possible, then that's fine with me.
This would include that we expect of each other to either fix such
easter eggs where we see them, or bring them to the attention of the
wider project membership so that it can be fixed by someone else.
If people get the impression that they can mess with the map and talk
about it, and all they get is a chuckle from the community, that
would be bad. If I say on the mailing list that I'm copying street
names from a copyrighted map (or that I know a number of items that
have been copied thusly), then I'll be told in no uncertain terms to
stop that. I would expect the same attitude towards the insertion of
easter eggs.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frederik at remote.org ## N49°00.09' E008°23.33'
More information about the legal-talk
mailing list