[OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Illegal activity
richard at systemeD.net
Mon Nov 2 11:51:45 GMT 2009
> It's not the question about laws in France, Germany or US vs England.
> It's the question to know if OSM database can survive if it contains
> data from illegal sources, independently of the country.
> Richard is convinced that the content of the photos is not protected
> and I agree on that point. But he just decides to ignore all the
> investments spent to rectify and georeference these photos on which
> his derivative work is based. And this investment and work is
Heh. I haven't decided to ignore it. I'm just not 100% convinced as yet
that it alters the clear lead set out by Bauman v Fussell.
US law is unambiguous: the doctrine of idea-expression merger means that
rectification doesn't make any difference. UK law is not clear, and you
have to interpret sweat-of-the-brow in the light of Bauman v Fussell and
Antiquesportfolio v Fitch. Canada is very interesting: Weetman v Baldwin
(heard in a fairly junior court) cites "accuracy not previously attained
by other mapmakers of the region in question... facilitated by a
particular process pioneered by a mapmaker" which can be interpreted in
wild and exciting ways.
I'm not particularly au fait with national copyright law in mainland
Europe. Doubtless you can answer on France: I can't see anything in
German law that would give protection. It's been suggested that EU
database right could also give some protection to rectification. I can't
yet see it myself (particularly in light of BHB vs William Hill), but
then, database right is really the modern day equivalent of the
"Only three people," said Palmerston, "have ever really understood the
Schleswig-Holstein business: the Prince Consort, who is dead; a German
professor, who has gone mad; and I, who have forgotten all about it."
Follow-ups to legal-talk.
More information about the legal-talk