[Talk-GB] OSM Analysis updated with new OS Locator data and a review of progress to date

[Peter Miller]

On 9 June 2011 12:14, Ed Avis <eda at waniasset.com> wrote:
> Peter Miller <peter.miller at ...> writes:
>
>>I have not used commercial mapping while creating the map,  but some
>>errors in Navteq, TeleAtlas and AA naming locally have subsequently
>>come to my attention subsequently and I see no reason why these should
>>not be in also included in not:name. It certainly doesn't break any
>>copyright to do so and provides strong evidence that we are doing
>>proper surveying rather than copying.
>
> I'm no lawyer so I cannot tell you that what you are doing is infringing
> copyright.  But I think it is better to take a strict clean-room approach.
> You may be disciplined when looking at the Navteq maps side-by-side with OSM;
> you may know exactly how far you can go in adding information based on them;
> but I think it would be better to stick to a simple and clear policy of never
> using other maps unless we know the copyright status is okay.
>
> To my mind, adding not:name from Navteq may provide evidence that we are
> surveying - but it also provides evidence that we are looking at Navteq's
> maps!  That makes it harder to argue independent creation if for any reason
> our map starts to closely resemble Navteq's and they allege copying.

I hear your concern. I think we are all slightly paranoid on the
subject but that is certainly better than not being paranoid (because
you never do know if that are out to get you:) )

You will notice that I hadn't added that information and am not
rushing to do us.

>>For example: Navteq (and Bing) incorrectly name the section of Nacton
>>Road in Ipswich from the junction with Felixstowe Road heading east as
>>Clapgate Lane. It isn't. It might be appropriate therefore to add a
>>not:name entry to OSM at that point with a not:name:note saying that
>>Navteq has a wrong.
>
> I think I might tag this if I saw widespread usage in web pages or secondary
> sources using the wrong name.  But I would prefer not to know which particular
> proprietary map the error originated from.
>

I think that is a wise approach.

> I'd suggest we reserve not:name for the OS Locator check, since that's
> overwhelmingly what it is used for - even if the tag name doesn't make that
> clear - and if there is a need to tag 'commonly used but wrong name' for a
> street we use something else like incorrect_name.

In the UK that may well be appropriate; elsewhere people may wish to
use it in relation to their local agency.


Regards,


Peter

>
> --
> Ed Avis <eda at waniasset.com>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>