Displaying Copyright

[A_Pirard]

I see much fuss in a lot of literature everywhere about maps Copyright. In articles with or without dates, recent or old, users exchange gossip. Even program support asking plain users details about it.
A program like JOSM can retrieve Copyright information from the server database and display it with relevant explanation every time the database is used. In order not to be harassing, it can remember the last information and display it again only if it changes. Now, should some database owner change his conditions, the only thing he has to do is change that database information and the whole world of users will be informed instantly.

[bastiK]

Can you be a bit more specific, what kind of databases do you have in mind?

[A_Pirard]

JOSM uses "des bases de données cartographiques" -> GoogleTranslate -> "map databases".
​http://www.ngi.be/testbed/wms/top10r_l08_fr?&request=capabilities
​http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Tile_Map_Service_Specification#TileMapService_Resource
etc...

[Don-vip]

Please explain your problem clearly. If you're not at ease with English, explain in French, I'll understand :)

[anonymous]

I shouldn't be asked if a server allows to use it for mapping,
I shouldn't have to ask anybody and receive no reply,
I shouldn't search the Web in vain.
I should be informed by JOSM, that's all.
The copyright is normally in the WMS/TMS server and should be clear.
JOSM should use it to inform its users.

[Don-vip]

Well, JOSM cannot guess magically if a WMS is authorized for OSM or not. There is nothing in the WMS specification that says that. So somebody will always have to check if its use is allowed or not.

The WMS listed on JOSM wiki (​http://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Maps) are of course authorized for OSM. If you know one and have the entire assurance it's authorized, feel free to add it to the list, it's a wiki.

More over, the wiki defines the eula parameter (​http://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Maps#Documentation) to present to the user an EULA text that has to be accepted, before the imagery source is added.

The only thing we can do in JOSM is display the contents of these optional fields, defined as follows in the WMS spec:

The OnlineResource element within the Service element may be used to refer to the web site of the service
provider. There are other OnlineResource elements used for the URL prefix of each supported operation (see
below).

The optional elements <Fees> and <AccessConstraints> may be omitted if they do not apply to the server. If
either of those elements is present, the reserved word “none” (case-insensitive) shall be used if there are no fees
or access constraints, as follows: <Fees>none</Fees>, <AccessConstraints>none</AccessConstraints>. When
constraints are imposed, no precise syntax has been defined for the text content of these elements, but client
applications may display the content for user information and action.

[A_Pirard]

On 2012-12-05 10:32, JOSM wrote :

So somebody will always have to check if its use is allowed or not.

Provided he is aware that there is an issue.

The WMS listed on JOSM wiki (​http://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Maps) are

of course authorized for OSM. If you know one and have the entire
assurance it's authorized, feel free to add it to the list, it's a wiki.

More over, the wiki defines the eula parameter
(​http://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/Maps#Documentation) to present to the
user an EULA text that has to be accepted, before the imagery source is
added.

JOSM may lookup the wiki to present that information but that's not warning that the server is not authorized if only authorized servers are listed.

<Fees> and <AccessConstraints>

That's exactly, plus web site, what I mean, because, unlike in the Wiki, that information always exists in a place that is the one and only place where the copyright is to be fetched from (a © notice is always written on the object and not in the newspaper).
If there is a policy change, JOSM can detect it and display a new warning instantly, which is not true for all the place where the information may be copied or not. The detailed information on a web site must be unambiguous.
Thank you.

[stoecker]

The assumption that OSM relevant copyright information in WMS messages is correct is highly debatable. In most cases it probably will be wrong.

[A_Pirard]

This is what is called a kitchen and egg situation.
If JOSM and other programs use the information in the WMS meta-data and the data owners know that, they will put it there.
One copyright information database per usage such as OSM is superfluous and tedious to maintain, one is enough: WMS meta-data.
The data owner is the person responsible to state their copyright, not the users.
What the users can do is to notify data owners that there is no copyright on their data.
A copyright information states disallowance, not allowance (records without a copyright are not copyrighted).
The WMS meta data has wisely been designed to hold the copyright notice in one place (or a pointer to its full text). It should be used.
The current situation is like records being published without copyright and people tying to build multiple copyright databases of them.
Presently, programs are offering WMS servers in their configuration without any copyright notice. Hiding a copyright notice is probably illegal. To be legal, those programs should display: Copyright: unspecified. "unspecified" is not their concern.

[bastiK]

If we have no explicit permission by the copyright holders, then we shouldn't use the imagery for OSM. You won't find reliable information on terms of use in the WMS-metadata. It's unfortunate, but a fact. So there is no other solution than to investigate on a case by case basis.

[A_Pirard]

If a user has no indication of a copyright, he may well use the data. and it will not be his fault.
That's unfortunate but a fact.
If JOSM tells him that a copyright may exist and asks him to warn the data owner that JOSM tells him that an indication of it is missing in the WMS data, ...
Up to you.

[bastiK]

All imagery sources that can be used for OSM should be listed here: Maps

Adding a custom entry is rather advanced and the user should know what they are doing.

[A_Pirard]

I've been prompted in #16693 to speak about this ticket.
So, I copy here what belongs to here.
Remember that "above" is in #16693

If you look at my tickets for one about displaying ©, you'll find #7415 (wontfix) Displaying Copyright.
It's my opinion that the copyright should be written once in the WMS metadata instead of once per OSM editor like JOSM.
But the #7415 (wontfix) answer says that JOSM refuses to show that © to the user.
It says that JOSM/Maps, ID/Maps, Potlatch/Maps, whatever/Maps, etc/Maps should all contain all the allowed permissions.
That's nonsense. And I know a number of accepted sources that are not even listed in JOSM.
Authors should write their consent once in the metadata and we should spend our time with mapping, not this sort of talk.
I read hereabove (outdated) WMS metadata trying to prove that we cannot use the cadastre and the #7415 (wontfix) answer says that the metadata cannot show that we can ("Well, JOSM cannot guess magically if a WMS is authorized for OSM or not. There is nothing in the WMS specification that says that. So somebody will always have to check if its use is allowed or not.")
It makes no sense to say that metadata can show that we cannot use the WMS server and on the other hand to say that it cannot show that we can.
I can't explain that obstinacy to say that we can't when it's obvious that we can. Look at the PICC story.