[Talk-us] Talk-us Digest, Vol 109, Issue 30

Chris teslas_moustache at riseup.net
Fri Dec 30 21:39:51 UTC 2016


There may be attribution in the ToS, Privacy Policy, or other release notes. I don't play, so can't check. And if they are using OSM data, I don't think there's any point in raising a stink about it. If it can be 100% verified that they are using OSM data, write to them an ask for attribution to be included in release notes if it's not already. It's probably in everyone's best interest to do just that. And if not, F it. Community. Mutual aid. Whatever.

On December 30, 2016 3:29:54 PM CST, talk-us-request at openstreetmap.org wrote:
>Send Talk-us mailing list submissions to
>	talk-us at openstreetmap.org
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>	https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>	talk-us-request at openstreetmap.org
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
>	talk-us-owner at openstreetmap.org
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of Talk-us digest..."
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: [OSM-talk] Beware Pokemon users (Rihards)
>   2. highway=trunk for NHS routes? (Albert Pundt)
>   3. Re: [OSM-talk] Beware Pokemon users (Clifford Snow)
>   4. Re: [OSM-talk] Beware Pokemon users (Bill Ricker)
>   5. Re: [OSM-talk] Beware Pokemon users (Simon Poole)
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2016 21:31:56 +0200
>From: Rihards <richlv at nakts.net>
>To: Bill Ricker <bill.n1vux at gmail.com>, Paul Johnson
>	<baloo at ursamundi.org>
>Cc: Jack Burke <burkejf3 at gmail.com>, OpenStreetMap talk-us list
>	<talk-us at openstreetmap.org>
>Subject: Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Beware Pokemon users
>Message-ID: <26f201de-793a-08a1-8ccc-201659b1e5d2 at nakts.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
>On 2016.12.30. 21:19, Bill Ricker wrote:
>> 
>> On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 2:07 PM, Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org
>> <mailto:baloo at ursamundi.org>> wrote:
>> 
>>     I wonder how we would politely license-check Niantic... 
>> 
>> 
>> ​Traditional map copyright violation proof would be adding a Trap
>Close​
>> ... do the have a map that shows name of feature that spawns
>critters?
>> Adding a nonsense footpath to no-where (shaped like a P ? ) in a
>> non-existent park and checking if it shows up in the PoGo in a few
>days
>> would do.
>
>the reports on this seem to indicate that they do not use anything
>close
>to realtime data - more like a year or more old, according to some
>anecdotal evidence.
>
>also, this is not about the visible map data (that still seems to be
>the
>assumption here and there). map data is clearly from google maps.
>what the pokemon go community is suggesting - that some of the osm data
>is used to make pokemon spawn there more often - or to make specific
>types appear. that's vague enough to require a pretty large dataset to
>prove to a reasonable degree.
>
>besides the potential lack of attribution, we should concentrate on
>attracting pokemon go players as mappers and advertise this potential
>connection as a reason to improve the map. even if there turns out to
>be
>no connection, we are better off publicity wise already.
>
>> -- 
>> Bill Ricker
>> bill.n1vux at gmail.com <mailto:bill.n1vux at gmail.com>
>> https://www.linkedin.com/in/n1vux 
>-- 
> Rihards
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 2
>Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2016 19:41:30 +0000 (UTC)
>From: Albert Pundt <roadsguy99 at yahoo.com>
>To: OpenStreetMap Talk-us List <talk-us at openstreetmap.org>
>Subject: [Talk-us] highway=trunk for NHS routes?
>Message-ID: <1540595880.4318832.1483126890492 at mail.yahoo.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>As a general rule, should highway=trunk be used for routes on the
>National Highway System? Considering that those routes are generally
>more backbone routes, more important than a lot of primary routes, it
>makes sense that they should be tagged with trunk.
>--Roadsguy
>-------------- next part --------------
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL:
><http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20161230/7d246cf8/attachment-0001.html>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 3
>Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2016 12:43:31 -0800
>From: Clifford Snow <clifford at snowandsnow.us>
>To: Bill Ricker <bill.n1vux at gmail.com>
>Cc: Jack Burke <burkejf3 at gmail.com>, Paul Johnson
>	<baloo at ursamundi.org>, OpenStreetMap talk-us list
>	<talk-us at openstreetmap.org>
>Subject: Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Beware Pokemon users
>Message-ID:
>	<CADAoPLpmuh88rXbQed0xdrDte3QuujRKArKtdfpz1A6adzbCJg at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 11:19 AM, Bill Ricker <bill.n1vux at gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>
>> ​Traditional map copyright violation proof would be adding a Trap
>Close​
>> ... do the have a map that shows name of feature that spawns
>critters?
>> Adding a nonsense footpath to no-where (shaped like a P ? ) in a
>> non-existent park and checking if it shows up in the PoGo in a few
>days
>> would do.
>>
>
>Can you help me understand what part of the ODbL [1] they are
>violating? As
>far I can tell, they don't modify the data nor do they display OSM
>tiles or
>make any of the data available. In fact Niantic makes every effort to
>keep
>the use of OSM private. It's only through the sleuth work of their
>users
>that we are aware its use.
>
>[1] http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/summary/
>
>Best,
>Clifford
>-- 
>@osm_seattle
>osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
>OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
>-------------- next part --------------
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL:
><http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20161230/12d8fe93/attachment-0001.html>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 4
>Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2016 16:08:24 -0500
>From: Bill Ricker <bill.n1vux at gmail.com>
>To: Clifford Snow <clifford at snowandsnow.us>
>Cc: Jack Burke <burkejf3 at gmail.com>, Paul Johnson
>	<baloo at ursamundi.org>, OpenStreetMap talk-us list
>	<talk-us at openstreetmap.org>
>Subject: Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Beware Pokemon users
>Message-ID:
>	<CAAbKA3VHFP8nz6sby=Fb_VH5Q9=f8kL20=bfprD39QhM4Vgs-A at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 3:43 PM, Clifford Snow
><clifford at snowandsnow.us>
>wrote:
>
>>
>> Can you help me understand what part of the ODbL [1] they are
>violating?
>> As far I can tell, they don't modify the data nor do they display OSM
>tiles
>> or make any of the data available
>
>
>(​It was not my assertion, I was hypothetically answering a HOW
>question.)
>
>OTOH & IANAL....
>
>Hypothetically speaking,
>Not making available tiles or data extracts based on OSM data  relieves
>a
>hypothetical potential infringer from having to make data available
>(Share
>Alike & Keep Open clauses).
>Any published use* requires Attribution.
>* (Which i interpret as non-intramural use, not contained within a
>household or corporate entity, although that is the sort of think
>lawyers
>could argue. It's safest to attribute even intramural use cases, but
>not
>required by license.)
>
>If indeed they are reaping OSM nodes and ways to populate PoGo
>rookeries
>[an unproven assertion], that would make the whole game a "use ... or
>work[s] produced from the database" and if PoGo doesn't count as
>"public",
>I don't know what is.  (The players are not employees, contractors, or
>family members of Niantic Labs.)
>
>Hiding the _use_ of OSM data doesn't make the derived work private;
>only
>hiding the derived work (game, web map, whatever) does; and i doubt
>having
>to register to play the game would be accepted as making all Niantic
>properties "private" not "public".
>(IANAL but I would wonder if hiding the use could be construed as
>willful
>and malicious infringement.)
>(If Niantic claims any copyright in their work, it is by definition of
>"copyright" a "published" work. In theory Trade Secret, Patent, and
>Copyright are incompatible IP protections. Only TradeMark plays nicely
>with
>others.)
>
>#IANAL
>
>
>
>-- 
>Bill Ricker
>bill.n1vux at gmail.com
>https://www.linkedin.com/in/n1vux
>-------------- next part --------------
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL:
><http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20161230/61985eb0/attachment-0001.html>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 5
>Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2016 22:29:20 +0100
>From: Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch>
>To: talk-us at openstreetmap.org
>Subject: Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Beware Pokemon users
>Message-ID: <7eef03aa-c39b-3ba1-0a72-dd46030a2f44 at poole.ch>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>The ODbL is very clear on what "Publicly" is:
>
>“Publicly” – means to Persons other than You or under Your control by
>either more than 50% ownership or by the power to direct their
>activities (such as contracting with an independent consultant).
>
>No need to speculate on that point.
>
>On the other hand, if they were using OSM data to trigger to spawning
>in
>a specific locations it would still be rather open if that is actually
>a
>use that is substantial. Up to now I haven't seen any evidence that
>couldn't be explained in numerous other ways that they are really using
>OSM data.
>
>Simon
>
>
>Am 30.12.2016 um 22:08 schrieb Bill Ricker:
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 3:43 PM, Clifford Snow
>> <clifford at snowandsnow.us <mailto:clifford at snowandsnow.us>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>     Can you help me understand what part of the ODbL [1] they are
>>     violating? As far I can tell, they don't modify the data nor do
>>     they display OSM tiles or make any of the data available
>>
>>
>> (​It was not my assertion, I was hypothetically answering a HOW
>question.)
>>
>> OTOH & IANAL....
>>
>> Hypothetically speaking,
>> Not making available tiles or data extracts based on OSM data 
>> relieves a hypothetical potential infringer from having to make data
>> available (Share Alike & Keep Open clauses).
>> Any published use* requires Attribution.
>> * (Which i interpret as non-intramural use, not contained within a
>> household or corporate entity, although that is the sort of think
>> lawyers could argue. It's safest to attribute even intramural use
>> cases, but not required by license.)
>>
>> If indeed they are reaping OSM nodes and ways to populate PoGo
>> rookeries [an unproven assertion], that would make the whole game a
>> "use ... or work[s] produced from the database" and if PoGo doesn't
>> count as "public", I don't know what is.  (The players are not
>> employees, contractors, or family members of Niantic Labs.)
>>
>> Hiding the _use_ of OSM data doesn't make the derived work private;
>> only hiding the derived work (game, web map, whatever) does; and i
>> doubt having to register to play the game would be accepted as making
>> all Niantic properties "private" not "public".
>> (IANAL but I would wonder if hiding the use could be construed as
>> willful and malicious infringement.)
>> (If Niantic claims any copyright in their work, it is by definition
>of
>> "copyright" a "published" work. In theory Trade Secret, Patent, and
>> Copyright are incompatible IP protections. Only TradeMark plays
>nicely
>> with others.)
>>
>> #IANAL
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Bill Ricker
>> bill.n1vux at gmail.com <mailto:bill.n1vux at gmail.com>
>> https://www.linkedin.com/in/n1vux 
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>-------------- next part --------------
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL:
><http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20161230/c0a5f9bc/attachment.html>
>-------------- next part --------------
>A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
>Name: signature.asc
>Type: application/pgp-signature
>Size: 488 bytes
>Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
>URL:
><http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20161230/c0a5f9bc/attachment.sig>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Subject: Digest Footer
>
>_______________________________________________
>Talk-us mailing list
>Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>End of Talk-us Digest, Vol 109, Issue 30
>****************************************

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20161230/d2b96bf1/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-us mailing list