[OSM-talk] Data copied from Google Maps

[andrzej zaborowski]

On 6 November 2012 00:29, Toby Murray <toby.murray en gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 5:12 PM, Pieren <pieren3 en gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 9:06 PM, Frederik Ramm <frederik en remote.org> wrote:
>>> Not as far as I know.
>>
>> Sad that OSMF is not taking five minutes to post the question to
>> Google. Some contributors did it in the past.
>>
>>> I don't think that a personal message to one individual mapper from someone,
>>> even if in a high position at Google, should be read as Google allowing
>>> every mapper to use their imagery.
>>
>> Most of third party sources agreements came from a high position from
>> that particular source. If we should wait an official 50 pages
>> contract document signed by 25 lawyers, approved and published by
>> OSMF, then we should stop using Bing aerial imagery immediately.
>>
>>> Furthermore, the terms of service contain other restrictions besides the one
>>> about bulk feeds, e.g. an attribution requirement.
>>
>> You probably noticed that the ToS is almost not about street view but
>> mainly about GMaps and GEarth. Attribution and permission is required
>> if you copy the photos or map data which is not what is discussed
>> here.
>
> The terms of service are for using the google maps API. In order to
> view street view images, you must use the google maps API. It doesn't
> leave a lot of room for interpretation.
>
> https://developers.google.com/maps/terms
>
> 10.1.1. General Restrictions. (a) No Access to Maps API(s) except
> through the Service. You must not access or use the Maps API(s) or any
> Content through any technology or means other than those provided in
> the Service
>
> So you the only way to access street view is through the API.
>
> 10.1.3 Restrictions against Data Export or Copying. (a) No
> Unauthorized Copying, Modification, Creation of Derivative Works, or
> Display of the Content. You must not copy, translate, modify, or
> create a derivative work (including creating or contributing to a
> database) of [...]
>
> Note the "or contributing to a database" in there. That pretty much
> exactly describes OSM.
>
> And regardless of the technical legality which may be somewhat of a
> gray area, Google has an infinite number of lawyers compared to OSMF
> and would likely prevail in any action they felt worth bringing
> against us.

The same is true for Microsoft and Yahoo!, in the end it boils down to
something someone at those companies said in an email to someone else.

Cheers