[Talk-us] Amazon's Organized College Campus Editing

[Mateusz Konieczny]

(1)
As far as I know - even if strictly speaking it is probably legally legal 
it is still against OSM rules.

Otherwise, following this further it would mean that copying map data
from Google Maps is fine, right? And just violation of their terms of use?

And as far as I know copying from Google Maps is not OK for OSM editing.

("OpenStreetMap is not the place to explore gray areas of international copyright law")
Or is it OK and fine to copy from Google Maps in USA?

Or is Google different because it operates also in countries with database rights?

(2)
Not a lawyer: but is it possible to claim creativity in selecting what is shown on the map,
area on the map and other similar arrangement?

Jul 26, 2021, 23:48 by ian.dees at gmail.com:

> On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 4:28 PM Mike Thompson <> miketho16 at gmail.com> > wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 2:57 PM Ian Dees <>> ian.dees at gmail.com>> > wrote:
>>
>>> In the US, it's acceptable to capture factual information (like building names, where a road is, phone numbers, websites etc.) from publicly posted information.
>>>
>> I am not a lawyer (perhaps you are Ian, I forget your background), but my understanding is that while facts cannot be copyrighted, collections of facts can be.  So copying all, or a substantial amount, of the information from another map could be problematic.  In addition, my understanding is that there are also other ways of protecting such intellectual property other than copyright, such as licensing.   Any clarification as to your sources and reasoning would be helpful for my understanding.
>>
>
> I am not a lawyer and usually try very hard not to be an armchair lawyer, but this is a pretty fundamental thing that we should be clear about and has fairly settled and relatively easy-to-understand case law to point to.
>
> [0] sums it up fairly nicely, but facts are not copyrightable because there is no creativity in producing them. Compilations of facts are also not copyrightable, but copyright might apply to the "expression" of that collection.
>
> For example, you'll often see recipes in a fancy book with pictures and unique content before and after the actual recipe. That's because the recipe itself is not copyrightable but the arrangement and artistic style of the book it's contained in *are* copyrightable. The most important reading for this is Feist v. Rural [1], where the Supreme Court clarified what compilations get copyright protections.
>
> In the situation described in the original post of this thread, mappers are taking publicly available, factual information from a campus website and collecting it into OpenStreetMap. While the university might be able to claim copyright on the artistic style or representation of the facts (the map or diagram itself), the facts themselves are not copyrightable and can be used freely.
>
> This differs from Europe, where a relatively recent "European Database Directive" [2] treats collections of facts differently.
>
> [0] > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_United_States#Compilations_of_facts_and_the_sweat_of_the_brow_doctrine
> [1] > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_in_compilation#Feist_v._Rural_(1991)
> [2] > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_in_compilation#The_European_Union_Database_Directive_(1996)
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20210727/5a8c7a41/attachment-0001.htm>