Tracing around copyrighted maps

[greaneyr]

Does anyone know what the legal status is of projects that use data obtained by using copyrighted images (maps and/or photographs) as a background then drawing points over the top of them? What I'm doing at the moment is trying to create an accurate digital data set for all lakes in the Taupo region, and thought I'd explore the potential to make the data available to other developers in the future. I'm using published maps as a background image in sbuilder then drawing highly detailed polygons over the top of them, giving LWM borders that are FAR superior to the default FS9 data.

Lake Taupo before: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3339/320774...8d88213.jpg?v=0
Lake Taupo after: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3411/320774...898371d.jpg?v=0
Yes, I even managed to get Motutapu Island to work, and since I'm using Christian's 75m mesh, it even has height!

Tokaanu Wharf before: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3085/320774...d9164f5.jpg?v=0
Tokaanu Wharf after: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3495/320774...0525f97.jpg?v=0

And for those who relate better to screenshots, here's the same area
before: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3497/320952...99a8d56ae_o.jpg
and after: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3391/320868...f3bc4877f_o.jpg

We actually have a Tongariro River Delta, and I'm rather fond of the inlet to the bottom left of the screen too. The lake level has risen by 36 metres too, so it's not a steep drop off all around anymore.

Initially, I had some 1300 points around the whole of Lake Taupo, but then when I compiled as a BGL and imported it, I ended up with a lot of LOD19 tiles that allowed me to edit them one at a time, so I'm going back and doing it again in higher res. Tokaanu was my proof-of-concept project for this.


Does anyone know what I could potentially do with this data after the fact?

[Timmo]

I don't see any problems with it- You are effectively doing the work yourself for the most part, not converting existing data.

However, Christians 'Roads and Rivers' already updates these areas to the same or better accuracy that you are trying to achieve?

[greaneyr]

QUOTE (Timmo @ Jan 20 2009, 08:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

However, Christians 'Roads and Rivers' already updates these areas to the same or better accuracy that you are trying to achieve?

At the peak resolution I'm modelling in, I'm actually pushing the limits of what the sim is capable of displaying, so I'd doubt the accuracy is better. If I released this data, it would be beneficial for all future developers, payware or freeware. I don't want to be seen as competing with Christian, and would like to start getting this data out into the public domain.

I dunno, maybe I'm dreaming or have thought of yet another project idea that's either been done before or based on old technology! I know I've put a lot of time into what I've done thus far and would like to do something other than keep it to myself this time!

[HardCorePawn]

I don't see any issues with... as I understand it, you cannot copyright "facts" ie. the shape of Lake Taupo. What they can copyright is their presentation of it. So if you were just making an exact copy of the map and distributing it, then you would be in trouble.

It is similar to the whole online TV listings thing...

[Bandit]

You've probably already done this but check their Copyright statement. It will proably have something along the lines of "no part of this may be reproduced either whole or in part".

The "in part" may be an issue. Depending on the owner they may allow you to use it in the background as long as you acknowledge them and credit them for it or they may charge you for it and want a cut of any $$ made.

Best advice I can give is ask the owner of the image in the first place.

[Christian]

Richard - if you're simply digitizing 1:50,000 maps you can save yourself the effort as Roads & Rivers is just that. Not sure what copyright implications are. It's all a bit complex with LINZ. But I fear for your index finger! (I've digitized the whole Cook Islands as there is no digital map, and that got quite painful).

Cheers,
Christian

QUOTE (Bandit @ Jan 25 2009, 11:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You've probably already done this but check their Copyright statement. It will proably have something along the lines of "no part of this may be reproduced either whole or in part".

The "in part" may be an issue. Depending on the owner they may allow you to use it in the background as long as you acknowledge them and credit them for it or they may charge you for it and want a cut of any $$ made.

Best advice I can give is ask the owner of the image in the first place.

[greaneyr]

QUOTE (HardCorePawn @ Jan 21 2009, 09:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't see any issues with... as I understand it, you cannot copyright "facts" ie. the shape of Lake Taupo. What they can copyright is their presentation of it. So if you were just making an exact copy of the map and distributing it, then you would be in trouble.

It is similar to the whole online TV listings thing...

Well this is my way of looking at it too. I could, in theory, walk around the shores of Lake Taupo with a GPS, download it from there onto my computer, and the data would (assuming the GPS was 100% accurate) end up identical to data sampled off a map. Simply because it's a factual rendering. The map is copyrighted, and the original data is copyrighted, but if you obtain the same information without taking either directly, to me you're not breaching any copyright.

QUOTE (Bandit @ Jan 21 2009, 12:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You've probably already done this but check their Copyright statement. It will proably have something along the lines of "no part of this may be reproduced either whole or in part".

Yeah it does have something like that. Again, the question is what they regard as 'reproduced'. If they wanted to be anal about it, they could argue I was breaching copyright by drawing a crude map of New Zealand, showing directions for how to get to my mate's beach house in Waihi beach. I'm reproducing the map 'in part' aren't I??

QUOTE (Christian @ Jan 21 2009, 06:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Richard - if you're simply digitizing 1:50,000 maps you can save yourself the effort as Roads & Rivers is just that. Not sure what copyright implications are. It's all a bit complex with LINZ. But I fear for your index finger! (I've digitized the whole Cook Islands as there is no digital map, and that got quite painful).

You're not wrong about the index finger thing! I was going to do one hi-res google map per day to avoid causing too much damage. I actually wondered whether a graphics tablet would be a better way to go.

I was really doing this as more of a 'contribution' to simming, rather than a desire for the end result. Roads and Rivers is essentially what I'd be making, but I also wouldn't be contributing a thing to this community - that's what I'm wanting to do really. Who'd have thought it would be so hard to come up with something that hasn't been done before in simming! There's so much to be done to get FS resembling real life, yet at the same time, it seems everything has been done before - something of a paradox.

[Christian]

QUOTE

You're not wrong about the index finger thing! I was going to do one hi-res google map per day to avoid causing too much damage. I actually wondered whether a graphics tablet would be a better way to go.[/quote]

I'm not 100% sure, but pretty certain that Google's user license prohibits digitizing. I vaguely recall a scenery developer asking google if he could grab airport boundaries from google earth and they replied that their user license wouldn't allow it. They simply want to protect themselves as the data they host isn't theirs and they have agreements to honor...

[greaneyr]

QUOTE (Christian @ Jan 22 2009, 10:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm not 100% sure, but pretty certain that Google's user license prohibits digitizing. I vaguely recall a scenery developer asking google if he could grab airport boundaries from google earth and they replied that their user license wouldn't allow it. They simply want to protect themselves as the data they host isn't theirs and they have agreements to honor...

Hence the reason why I asked - it's a copyrighted image derived from data whose copyright is owned by someone other than google. But... it comes back to the point that the data is factual. They couldn't look at scenery produced using their data then digitised and say "this was built from our data" because it would look exactly the same as scenery produced using data derived from an alternate source (such as a GPS tracklog).

I guess what I'm trying to say is, how would they prove it, when the data is based on something that is a fact?

[NZ255]

I wouldn't have even bothered asking. I thought about this last night and I think you should use it and not worry about it. Reproducing it would be copying the map onto the terrain in FS. You're just using it as a guide. Anyway what are they going to do to prove it? Like you said it's the shape of a lake and you could have got the data from anywhere. How are going to prove you got the data from their map.

[HardCorePawn]

Apparently they do cunning things like make deliberate 'mistakes'... I was reading an article a while back where some guy was talking about a street he found on google maps that didn't exist... he knew this, because it went right through his house or something.

The idea being that they put fake streets in, so if someone copies their data, they can say "well obviously they copied our data, as it has this deliberate mistake in it"

Just something to be aware of.