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

[Barnett, Phillip]

PHILLIP BARNETT
SERVER MANAGER

200 GRAY'S INN ROAD
LONDON
WC1X 8XZ
UNITED KINGDOM
T +44 (0)20 7430 4474
F
E PHILLIP.BARNETT at ITN.CO.UK
http://WWW.ITN.CO.UK
P  Please consider the environment. Do you really need to print this email?
-----Original Message-----

From: legal-talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org [mailto:legal-talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Ed Avis
Sent: 15 October 2009 11:34
To: legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] FW: Crown copyright dates ( OS Reference 72267)

Ed Avis wrote:

>Would it not be better to get a legal opinion?

Ed,
Unfortunately we can't afford to pay copyright lawyers. (Or to fight the OS in the courts)
But we can read case law:

"I think it clear that it will not create copyright in a new edition of a work, of which the copyright has expired, merely to make a few emendations of the text, or to add a few unimportant notes. To create a copyright by alterations of the text, these must be extensive and substantial, practically making a new book. With regard to notes, in like manner they must exhibit an addition to the work which is not superficial or colourable, but imparts to the book a true and real value, over and above that belonging to the text. This value may perhaps be rightly expressed by saying that the book will procure purchasers in the market on special account of these notes. When notes to this extent and of this value are added, I cannot doubt that they attach to the edition the privilege of copyright."
Lord Kinloch, Black v Murray 1870
http://www.ipsofactoj.com/international/2002/Part10/int2002%2810%29-008.htm

As has been pointed out by Andy and myself, the OS themselves appear to have shared this view at least in the past, by explicitly not claiming new copyright on certain maps when printing new editions with 'minor revisions'.

Obviously this still doesn't get us anywhere if OS maintain the stance quoted recently - we're definitely not going to take it to judicial review!
But it may be worth further dialogue with the OS to see if they might re-examine the evidence.

If not, we'll just map it ourselves anyway, a little slower!!!

Cheers

Phillip

Please Note:

 

Any views or opinions are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent 
those of Independent Television News Limited unless specifically stated. 
This email and any files attached are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual
or entity to which they are addressed. 
If you have received this email in error, please notify postmaster at itn.co.uk 

Please note that to ensure regulatory compliance and for the protection of our clients and business,
we may monitor and read messages sent to and from our systems.

Thank You.