[talk-au] Mapping "off track" hiking routes

[Little Maps]

Hi Kim, I don’t believe this problem would exist given the use case described in the text, which is as follows...

A mapper has evidence from a legal source (eg Bing, Strava, GPX trace) of a track which they are contemplating adding to OSM. Should they decide to add it, then the source:geometry tag would be Bing etc, as normal.

If they find a management plan that provides adequate reasons why it is preferable that the track not be mapped then the mapper may decide not to add the track. By not proceeding, no copyright breach can occur.

However, your point is a good one, and it may be useful to add a caveat to the end of the text like the following...

“As always, copyrighted material in published reports should not be added to OSM.”

> On 26 Oct 2020, at 9:53 am, Kim Oldfield <osm at oldfield.wattle.id.au> wrote:
> 
>  Will this cause copyright problems, particularly as many government agencies don't understand the benefits of open licenses?
> 
>> On 25/10/20 5:31 pm, Little Maps wrote:
>> MAPPERS ARE ENCOURAGED TO PERUSE RESERVE MANAGEMENT PLANS ON THE WEB OR TO DISCUSS EDITS WITH AGENCY STAFF WHEN CONSIDERING ADDING TRACKS IN CONSERVATION RESERVES.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au