[Talk-ca] Digitizing over an aerial photo

[Yves Moisan]

Le 2011-02-01 16:46, Richard Weait a écrit :
> On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 4:13 PM, Yves Moisan<yves.moisan at boreal-is.com>  wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I have a trivia for you license-interested/competent folks.  Say I have a
>> recent aerial photo coverage of a really nice town that I'd like to use to
>> digitize features, is there an issue if the photo is private (city-owned) ?
>>   The way I see it is that if I'm digitizing a point/line/polygon and
>> assigning it attributes, I'm really photo-interpreting so the data is
>> "mine".  Of course the underlying photograph helped, but it's not data per
>> se.  Any arguments/counter arguments or real legalese pointers ?
> The policy of the OpenStreetMap community is that we hold ourselves to
> a very high standard when we respect the works and rights of others.
> And so any action that is not clearly and explicitly permitted by a
> rights holder, is not permitted as a source for OpenStreetMap
> contributions.
> As an example, we have permission from Bing / Microsoft to use Bing
> imagery for tracing / photo-interpretation.  So we can do that.
>
> We don't have permission from Google to use Google aerial imagery for
> the same purpose.  So we don't do that.
>
> Please get permission from the rights holder to use that image for
> photo interpretation.
Hi Richard,

Fair enough.  I wasn't going to digitize features in a whole town 
without some sort of permissions.  Plus, I won't be alone anyhow.  The 
real question is how does that translate in the digitized features ?  Do 
I need to add a feature "attribution" attribute mentioning where from it 
was digitized or is just getting the "you can go ahead and trace" go 
from the photo owner good enough a proof ?

In my opinion it is neither accurate nor fair to say feature X "belongs" 
to whoever is the owner of the base data out of which it was *created* 
through the act of photo-interpretation.  Technically, the feature's 
attribution really is that of the digitizer.  This doesn't mean I want 
to go ahead and pretend I have drawn a feature myself as I would do over 
my own GPS traces, but I sure wouldn't attribute a feature I drew 
(potentially compensating for radial displacement etc. while digitizing) 
to the owner of a photograph.  How do we go about this so that is fair 
to both the "base data" provider and the "real data" (i.e. feature) 
provider ?

Thanx,

Yves