[OSM-talk] Illegal activity

[John Smith]

2009/11/1 Anthony <osm at inbox.org>:
> If you're tracing roads, you're copying the shape of the roads.
> You're certainly copying *something*, but that something is probably
> not copyrighted (and almost certainly not copyrighted by the person
> who took the picture).  The copyright on the shape and location of the
> road would be held by whoever designed the road - which makes for an
> interesting predicament in any jurisdictions which would uphold such
> copyrights.

That's flat out wrong.

The reason they ban cameras from concert events etc is because they
can prevent you from taking photos, but once the photo exists it is
copyright to the person that took it.

As for the design of the road, Ford tried to asert it owns the look of
it's cars over some car enthusit group that made a calendar, Ford
ended up backing down but it was unlikely they would win other than by
bankrupting the other side.

To be copyright infringement you'd have to copy the technical plans.

> rules - don't do it, but if you do it it isn't going to destroy the
> database.  Or are you claiming OSM could be involved in a tortious

I'm not claiming anything, merely trying to point out people were
using the wrong terminology to describe something.

> interference suit?  I don't see it.  Not as long as they tell people
> not to violate contracts (just like they tell people not to trespass).

In any case OSM would be clean because they didn't breach anyone's
contract, unless of course they actively promoted it to occur and that
isn't happening.

> The problem with traces is more than just a breach of contract.

No it's not, you are deriving, not copying so it's breach of contract,
that is if there is a T&C stating you can't do it.