[OSM-talk] What would you do if...

[Dave]

On 1/29/07, Mike Collinson <mike at ayeltd.biz> wrote:
>
> Totally agree with you on (c). You have avoided potential copyright
> violation and in my opinion is that OSM is implicitly based on
> "reasonable observation" by its contributors.  May be there ought to
> be a statement to that effect.  Not recording it or putting it as a
> footway loses valuable field information. Shoot first refine later
> seems a practical modus operandi to me.
>
> Mike
>
> PS Doesn't the UK Ordnance Survey still always carry a by-line
> something to the effect of "the existence of a something or other
> does not necessarily imply a public right of way"? If the big boys do it
> ...



Just a question on the law here: isn't there something that says if there's
nothing to indicate it isn't a right of way such as a gate saying private,
and people use it for a right of way for over a certain time, then it is in
fact now a right of way?

I was under that impression because of the number of signs you find around
saying there is no implied right of way and quoting something like the
highways act 1975. Although that might be just a liability thing I suppose.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20070129/9e60e779/attachment.html>