[Osmf-talk] Copyright in the Digital Single Market

Thu Sep 13 17:00:06 UTC 2018

Another problem is, those promoting Art 13 keep pointing to filters as a
"solution", but what would one filter against?

Filtering for vandalism on OSM can involve, for example, checking
changesets against lists of profanity, slurs, etc. Someone has to build
that list of words, of course, but that is an issue that Wikipedia and
others have been working at for some time.

But map data? We all know that maps can be copyrighted. How could you
possibly filter newly added map data against "proprietary" map data,
especially when, by purpose all maps will look very similar when they try
to accurately represent real-world  circumstances?

We've already seen music and video filters fail terribly for public domain
music and video. If I play a Bach song on a piano and recorded it, Sony
would claim ownership and want payment for it, because they also have a
recording of someone playing Bach. News stations have claimed ownership of
NASA videos, because they used a NASA clip in a news report that they then
added to the filters. This happens all the time where the user material is
very similar to "proprietary" material because both are based on something
in the public domain. A video of white noise got ownership claims from five
other people! And this is with Google spending 100 million dollars and many
years trying to build a filter that works!

Any type of copyright filter for geodata (or any other kind of data) would
be impossible to build. A similar problem exists for software code and open
source. And yet you have these MEPs saying "just filter and pay!" without
thinking how and who.

On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 1:57 AM Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch> wrote:

> The problem with the proposed regulation as is, is that there are no safe
> harbour terms.  With other words a "platform" is liable for user submitted
> content no matter what.
>
> For large parts of the creative industry that is not such a big issue,
> because you can negotiate agreements with the collecting societies (or the
> government puts tariffs in place that you simply need to pay) see
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_collective These are the
> organisations that for example collect fees from radio and TV stations,
> from sales empty data carriers (DVDs etc) and hard disks, use of copying
> machines and so on, and distribute the received funds to their members.
>
> Well known example is youtube paying fees to GEMA, but anybody that has
> ever played or broadcasted music publicly knows this (or at least should
> know, because they undoubtedly owe money to the respective collection
> society) .
>
> Essentially the legislation intends to force "platforms"  to enter in to
> such agreements with collecting societies where they exist, the difficult
> part is where these don't exist or only represent part of the right holders
> or special cases. For example Wikipedia (use in an encyclopedia) or OSM
> (subject matter). From the wording of the proposed regulation it is
> completely clear that the notion of users owning the rights in the uploaded
> content themselves didn't even remotely cross the minds of the legislators.
>
> Simon
>
> PS: many aeons ago (aka 90 something) I was part of a multi-stakeholder
> group that explored potential tariffs for Internet use of classical
> creative works (music, print and so on). I have to say that the arguments
> on both sides haven't really changed at all.
>
> Am 13.09.2018 um 08:47 schrieb Jaak Laineste:
>
>
> Can you do quick summary what is the issue or threat for OSM exactly here,
> in layman's terms?
>
> I understand how Wikimedia as generic platform has their concerns, as they
> may need to cite articles from traditional media etc. AFAIK OSM has very
> "appropriate and proportionate " measures in place since the beginning,
> just as required in the bill, to protect against illegal upload of
> copyrighted content, which are illegal imports in our terms. It is never
> bullet-proof, but I don't see any legal risk or trouble here. Of course it
> could be me being ignorant or naive.
>
> Jaak
>
>
> On 12 Sep 2018, at 23:02, Manfred A. Reiter <ma.reiter at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> In Brussels, politicians decide things that might endanger OpenStreetMap
> as a project as a whole.
>
>
> http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+AGENDA+20180912+SIT+DOC+XML+V0//EN
> Copyright in the Digital Single Market
> *Report:  Axel Voss (A8-0245/2018
> <http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&reference=A8-2018-0245&language=EN>)*
> Report on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of
> the Council on copyright in the Digital Single Market
> [COM(2016)0593
> <http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi%21celexplus%21prod%21DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2016&nu_doc=0593>
>  - C8-0383/2016 - 2016/0280(COD)
> <http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/ficheprocedure.do?lang=en&reference=2016/0280%28COD%29>
> ]
> Committee on Legal Affairs
>
> Why doesn't the official representation of the community comment on these
> eminently important things?
> No tweets, no press release, nothing! - Or did I miss something?
>
> Is the OSMF aware that politicians may not understand what their decisions
> mean for OSM?
> May I know, what OSMF did to defend our data and our project like
> Wikimedia does?
> Or are tweets like this
> https://twitter.com/WikimediaDE/status/1039873938598363136 nonsens?
> Ortter.com/WikimediaDE/status/1039873938598363136
> https://twitter.com/WikimediaDE/status/103987393859836313
> cheers
>
> --
> ## Manfred Reiter - -
> ## www.weeklyOSM.eu <http://www.weeklyosm.eu/>
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing listosmf-talk at openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20180913/d9c9e8a6/attachment.html>