[OSM-legal-talk] FW: Crown copyright dates ( OS Reference 72267)

[Ed Avis]

Barnett, Phillip <PHILLIP.BARNETT at ...> writes:

>The crux point is what triggers a new copyright date.
>
>Guidance notes from the OPSI - 

>"A reprint or new impression without any substantial changes to the text would
>not constitute a new copyright work."
> 
>The last sentence is the important one - of the examples that you sent to them
>below, all explicitly claim 'minor' changes to the work, and so the OPSI
>guidelines indicate that no copyright date change would be the
>case,

Not so.  'Minor changes' is not the same as 'no substantial changes'.  If they
have revised the map based on resurveying the area, even if just to add a
couple of new roads or a housing development, or to correct mistakes,
it's pretty clear that a new copyright period comes into existence.

>So the situation should be - 
>A map published with a (c) date means the (c) date applies and if no (c) date
>printed then the FIRST publication date on the sheet applies.

No, if no copyright date is there then the most recent revision applies.
If the map was first issued in 1950, revised in 1960, then reprinted with
no changes (or no substantial changes, e.g. just a new cover sheet) in 1970,
then the copyright period is from 1960 onwards.

>And we have plenty of examples collected of where the revision date is later
>than the explicitly printed copyright date, which rather proves my point. (eg
>my copy of SO13, Talgarth, (c) 1951, major road revisions 1976)

That does argue for your position but I don't think it is strong enough
evidence.

>Now, who's going to take this up with Tony Gray? (I'm happy to argue the
>point, if you don't mind my quoting your correspondence. Otherwise I'll just
>point him to the OPSI guidance)

Would it not be better to get a legal opinion?

-- 
Ed Avis <eda at waniasset.com>