[OSM-talk] How is there not any creative-type (US) copyright in OSM data?

[Eugene Alvin Villar]

On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 11:26 PM, Anthony <osm at inbox.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 9:55 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar <seav80 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>> But I would argue that a selection of a finite set from an infinite
>> possible nodes that can represent the centerline of a road is a sufficiently
>> creative endeavor that is automatically afforded copyright according to the
>> US copyright system.
>
>
> Inaccuracy isn't copyrightable.  Mistakes aren't copyrightable (see
> Feist).  The intent of OSM is to represent the centerline of a road as
> accurately as possible.  There aren't an infinite number of possibilities
> which we creatively choose from.  (First of all, the number of possibilities
> that can be represented is finite, as the number of decimal places is
> finite.  But more to the point, the purpose is to record exactly one result,
> and any deviation from that is simply an error.)  Mistakes and inaccuracy do
> not represent creative input.
>

It's true that the intent of OSM is the represent the centerline of a road
as accurately as possible but I think that only means that the selected
nodes have to be positioned accurately. Now whether one set of 20 nodes or a
different set of 20 nodes better represent the shape of a road is a matter
of creative subjectivity. Neither set is more mistaken nor more inaccurate
than the other.

For practical purposes, we can't add an infinite number of nodes or should
even add 100 nodes to represent a perfectly circular roundabout, so the fact
that we use maybe 8 or even 16 nodes to represent that roundabout is not a
"mistake" or an "inaccuracy". Now the particular selection of 8 or 16 nodes
is what's creative and so those set of nodes deserves copyright.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20091207/89e2d1f7/attachment.html>