Wouldn't street names fall under common knowledge? I understand using a Google Maps overlay to update positions would be a clear violation, but using it to verify something doesn't seem as clear. Not that I'm an expert on copyright law

via Tapatalk

gettingthere wrote:Likely none of us are attorneys. I suggest you have an attorney review their license agreements to see if you can use the street name data. If they say yes, post a copy of their written details here so we can all benefit from their interpretation.

Maybe after I get that big promotion I'll fork out the dough.

via Tapatalk

gettingthere wrote: We want Waze to succeed. We don't want them to be tied up in lawsuits, reputation destroyed in the press, or worse - shut down due to improper actions by us, the community mappers.

I totally agree and think that it should be taken very seriously.

gettingthere wrote: So they are actually spending money and creating this stuff. Waze should not get a free pass to use this data without permission.

I don't see the valid argument here. If something can be legally used (copied, etc.), whether by design or accidentally, I don't think it matters who spent the money (or did the leg work). Along the same line, it could be said that Wazers who only use the product and don't contribute in some form (alerts, edits, etc.) fall under this category. Obviously, that would defeat the purpose of this software and I don't actually think that it should be limited to contributors.

I'm not trying to pick a fight, just having a discussion.

On a semi-related note, would it be safe to assume that since we legally use Bing aerials for Waze that we could use use Bing maps for street verification or would this fall under two different usage types and licensed individually?

mapcat wrote:If you create a map of Annapolis that calls the road in front of your house Benson Blvd, and you copyright it, you are not copyrighting something that is anyone's work but your own. And if another company creates a map that shows Benson Blvd there without asking for and receiving permission from you, then they are in violation of copyright. And if they use that map to make a profit, you will have every right to sue them and expect some sort of compensation.

But if you can trace (I know people don't) that road back to a public source (or non-copyrighted) no company along the way would have rights to claim copyright on it.

BUT it would be safer to use a known original work that has been licensed for commercial use (or is public domain).

xteejx wrote:Copyright or not, it falls under a derivative work.

Which if it's not copyright is legal in the U.S.

xteejx wrote:Just remember not to drop the soap

HA!

CBenson wrote:

gettingthere wrote:

CBenson wrote:I would respectfully suggest that you get the advice from the attorney before so definitively stating what is illegal.

No need. I am not referring to any sources that have license agreements that prohibit me from using their material.

Nor am I and I quite frequently have Google and Mapquest open when I edit.

I believe this boiling down to what is legal or what will you not get caught doing (not necessarily great practice).

I also think "easter eggs" have lost their effectiveness since digital media took over. Now instead of just photocopying a map (with no easy way around them), you can verify the map from multiple independent sources and greatly reduced you chances of using copyrighted material (i. e. a trap) which is what I believe CBenson was trying to say and therefore it would be more than likely legal.

However it still would definitely be against their usage agreement which means they could terminate your account.

via Tapatalk

Be careful because the wiki doesn't necessarily give the stance of the company since it is community edited. You could say that it's the popular opinion..

via Tapatalk

You mean like this?

http://www.waze.com/wiki/index.php/Road ... nformation
OR
http://www.waze.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=129&t=13695

AlanOfTheBerg wrote:Or even better, not referencing the forum

Good call, I'll update the Wiki.

Yea but I think when popular sites (Google, Bing, Mapquest, etc.) are NOT included, it's pretty safe to assuming the are on the "DO NOT USE" list. Not to mention it's also "implied" on the Map Editing Wiki page.

Maybe once I can actually log on to the wiki, I'll work on clearing that up and spelling it out better for the newer editors (if they will actually read it ) and work with some of the users to get it on a new page.

-Aaron