[OSM-legal-talk] Someone already had a look at the Bing TermsofUse?

[David Groom]

> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Grant Slater" <openstreetmap at firefishy.com>
> To: "Licensing and other legal discussions." 
> <legal-talk at openstreetmap.org>
> Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2010 8:04 PM
> Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Someone already had a look at the Bing
> TermsofUse?
>
>
>
> On 19 December 2010 16:53, David Groom <reviews at pacific-rim.net> wrote:
>>> Have you read? Microsoft mention a whole lot more than what link to....
>>> http://www.bing.com/community/site_blogs/b/maps/archive/2010/12/01/bing-maps-aerial-imagery-in-openstreetmap.aspx
>>> Try the google cache version: http://bit.ly/eUjkKS
>>
>> Yes Grant, I have read both of those, in particular the statement on both
>> which says "To learn more and see the full terms of use, please see the
>> Bing
>> Maps Imagery Editor license."
>>
>
> And the "Bing Maps Imagery Editor license" link points to the
> OpenGeoData blog post which has the license + downloadable PDF.
> http://opengeodata.org/microsoft-imagery-details
>
>> Therefore to comment on the terms of use I decided to refer to the
>> licence,
>> and not the blog posts you refer to, since the blogs tell me to refer to
>> the
>> licence.
>>
>
> Download the license from the OpenGeoData post, it is called ""Bing
> Maps Imagery Editor API License FINAL.pdf"
>
As far as I can see that document is the same as the one I was referring to.

>>>
>>> What you link to in [3] is Bing's standard terms for everyone else...
>>> Not what applies for OSM.
>>
>> Could you please refer me to the source for why these terms do not apply
>> to
>> OSM? Particularly in view of the fact that, as I referred to earlier, in
>> the Bing Maps Imagery Editor license it says the terms do apply (see
>> section
>> 6)
>>
>
> Open JOSM or Potlatch2, the Terms-Of-Use link that is specified is:
> http://opengeodata.org/microsoft-imagery-details
> And sure, this should be more explict.

That's what I'm saying.  As far as I can see the licence does not state that 
derived works can me made from Bing imagery.

>
>>>
>>> We have permission to derive NEW works from their imagery on condition
>>> that the new works go into OSM.
>>
>> Good, please show me where this is clearly stated. Then we can end the
>> discussion.
>>
>
> Better detailed here:
> http://www.systemed.net/blog/?p=100

Now I see where your coming from. Its OK to use all imagery, even Google, we 
don't actually need a licence. Which is an interesting argument, though 
completely irrelevant to the question of whether Microsoft have actually 
granted us a licence to derive data from their imagery.

> And now add to that we have explit permission to use the imagery....
>

I've repeatedly asked where is the explicit permission to use Bing Imagery 
to create derived works, all the only answer is "we have it".  As I've said 
before if its there please show us where it is.

What appears to me to have been granted is as follows:

ARGUMENT 1

>From Section 2 of the licence[1]

"Right to use: Subject to your compliance with this agreement, you may 
develop or host an Application",  as an end user I'm neither deveoping nor 
hosting an application, so its possible this licence doesn't apply to me.

So under the licence the developers of JOSM are allowed to incorporate Bing 
Imagery, hoever they may do so only in accordance with section 6 of the 
Licence which states that an end user (eg me, and the majority of OSM 
contributors) must comply with the Bing maps TOU [2], and those TOU prohib 
the creation of derived works without prior wrtten consent.

Result: its OK to develop JOSM, potlatch et all, so that they show Bing 
imagery, but the end user cant use it for tracing.

ARGUMENT 2

The licence [1] does apply to end users

section 2 of the licence says its OK for an application to dispaly Bing 
imagery.  I use JOSM it can display Bing imagery, there is no problem.

section 2 of the licence says any updates I make using the application 
(JOSM) have to be contributed back to openstreetmap.

That's all it says.  It says nothing about using Bing Imagery to create 
derived works. You are infering that because the licence says that updates I 
make using JOSM have to be contributed back to OSM  then those updates would 
have come from tracing from Bing, and so the implication is its OK to trace 
from Bing.

David

> In fact, as I have also pointed out before, it is unclear that Bing Maps
>> Imagery Editor license actually apply to end users anyway, in which case
>> the
>> only bit applicable to end users is [3] which says deriving works is not
>> allowed.
>>
>
> See above.
>
> / Grant

[1] downlaod available at http://opengeodata.org/microsoft-imagery-details
[2] http://www.microsoft.com/maps/assets/docs/terms.aspx