[OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data

[Anthony]

On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 10:37 AM, Rob Myers <rob at robmyers.org> wrote:
> On 08/05/2010 03:20 PM, Anthony wrote:
>>
>> Still waiting for that definition of geodata.
>
> It's a contraction of "geographical data".

I didn't ask for an expanded form, I asked for a definition.  If you'd
like to be tricky, you can even try to construct a definition
backwards from the two factors you are trying to achieve.  1) A
collection of geodata is never copyrightable; and 2) OSM is nothing
but a collection of geodata.

I say such a definition is not possible to create.

>> Just because the map is
>> in digitized vector format doesn't mean it's not a digital version of
>> a visual work of cartography.
>
> The fixed form is different. The fact that one is a database (that may not
> attract copyright) and the other a picture (that may be covered by specific
> map-related copyright) is legally as well as philosophically significant.

And what's that difference?  If I create a map in Photoshop, is there
copyright on the picture, but not the file used to create that
picture?  It's no different if I create a map in Mapnik.

POIs, fine.  Ways, which represent roads, no.  A way is not merely an
uncreative collection of facts.  There is selection, as to which facts
to express, and there are even deviations from facts, when the pure
facts wouldn't look right (consider the merging of two roads, for
example).

> Consider a written musical score and a recording of a performance of that
> score. The score is not the performance, and there are different laws and
> aspects of the law covering the two fixed forms.

And both are subject to copyright law.  Good analogy.