[OSM-talk] Maps and names

[Collinson Mike]

At 12:04 AM 2/09/2006, SteveC wrote:
>* @ 01/09/06 02:27:19 PM emil79 at gmail.com wrote:
> > >On 9/1/06, Lars Aronsson <lars at aronsson.se> wrote:
> >
> > >Unless the lat/long coordinates in the original Wikipedia articles were
> > >collected using GPS then chances are that this information was 
> lifted from
> > >a
> > >map.  Wikipedia's GFDL license would not protect us from the original
> > >copyright infringment.
> >
> > Well some of us don't think taking coords from a map is copyright
> > infringement - as the posts below show, this view leads to ridiculous
> > conclusions. I'll say it again: you can't copyright facts.
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EU_Database_Directive
>
>have fun,
>
>SteveC steve at asklater.com http://www.asklater.com/steve/

Interesting, thanks Steve. Assuming that world-wide this is probably 
the most restrictive "legislation" I went on to read the actual 
directive, it is not very long and the key provisions for us even 
shorter (articles 7 - 10 and possibly 5:

http://europa.eu.int/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexapi!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=en&numdoc=31996L0009&model=guichett

Generally, it does speak only about extracting or re-utilizing "all 
or a substantial part of the contents of a database" which seems 
reasonable and unconcerning.  However this Article 7 clause does seem 
worrying and, IANAL, could do with formal opinion:

"5. The repeated and systematic extraction and/or re-utilization of 
insubstantial parts of the contents of the database implying acts 
which conflict with a normal exploitation of that database or which 
unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the maker of the 
database shall not be permitted."

I still believe however that encouraging a highish level of source 
attribution (with the data or by the contributor personally) plus a 
formal policy of quick surrender - removing data provided by a 
particular contributor - coupled with the actual tools to do so 
protects OSM both from having the whole site shut down and from 
having to fight a legal battle.

On a more positive note,  I see that generally protection is only 
given for 15 complete calendar years from the completion of the 
database or when it was later made public (although a "substantial 
change" starts the clock again).

Mike
Oz