[OSM-talk] Can OSM sources be public domain CC-0(zero)?

[Jukka Rahkonen]

Simon Biber wrote:

> On Thu, 2 September, 2010 11:22:54 AM, andrzej zaborowski <balrogg
> <at> gmail.com> wrote:

>> Besides, there's nothing in the Google Terms of Service which says
>> "you may not make use of the facts you learn by using this website".
>> That'd just be silly. Not to mention unconscionable, and therefore
>> unenforcible.

> Google does say that certain information displayed is proprietary 
> and may not be provided to others.

> "any unauthorized copying or reproduction of the content in any form,
> or by any means, is not permitted"

Did anybody read the discussion in
http://www.edparsons.com/2008/10/who-map-is-it-anyway/

The question was not about copying or reproducing  something that 
exists on a map. It was about using an existing map or satellite 
imagery for locating some new feature that does not appear on the map.
This is how the discussion started.

The question by Richard Fairhurst (2008 October 9)
"Interesting (I know, I know, I should get a life). But if the nice chaps
at Richmond tell you there’s a recycling box at the corner of Park Lane
and Park Road, and you use Google (map or satellite) to determine that
said corner is at 51.425297,-0.334935, isn’t that a derivation?
Because it would be really, really cool if it wasn’t."

The answer by Ed Parsons (2008 October 9)
"@ Richard,
OK so this is really cool then, as I can use Google maps to determine
the actual location, as it both does not occur on the original map or
at Richmond’s website. It is the product of my interpretation in this
case based on local knowledge and the imagery therefore it is not derived !"

Niklas is having very analogous use case. He took a photo and he knows 
he was standing at the corner of Park Lane and Park Road. If he then
looks at Google maps and takes the coordinates for geotagging his photo,
Ed Parsons seems to think that the geolocation of the photo is not derived.