[talk-au] Does this mean?.....
inas66+osm at gmail.com
Tue Dec 21 00:17:48 GMT 2010
On 21 December 2010 10:59, Nick Hocking <nick.hocking at gmail.com> wrote:
Also I believe that the following actions also entail little or no
> "independent intellectual effort".
> 1) walking/riding/driving around with a gps turned on and collecting GPS
> 2) Tracing roads from either GPS traces or any imagery.
> 3) Copying down street names from a street sign and then adding then to a
> traced road.
> 4) Noting and publishing the location of POIs.
> 5) etc...
> Therefore, does this also mean that any contributions to the OSM project
> attract no copyright and can be freely used to derive information from,
> without any attribution, if so desired?
> I really hope the answers to these two questions are yes, since it appeals
> to what I consider "freedom of information".
My reading of the case is that it would have no bearing on deciding whether
copyright subsists in each individual's manual contributions to OSM. The
rules to determine that aren't really addressed, and Australia has typically
has had a very low threshold for whether copyright subsists in a work. My
opinion is copyright likely would still subsist in each contribution that
was any greater than the purely trivial, and that the legal landscape to
determine this hasn't really altered.
However, if copyright doesn't subsist in each individual contribution, then
this case will have a real bearing on whether copyright subsists in the
entire OSM database. I would say that if copyright doesn't subsist in the
individual contributions, then the automated process that we have to compile
the database from the contributions doesn't meet the requirements to have a
new copyrightable work, and therefore copyright would not subsist in the OSM
db in Australia.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-au