Comment by ggm
15 hours ago
Not wanting to over-do it, but is there possibly an argument the data about geospatial should be in the commons and google have some obligation to put the data back into the commons?
I'm not arguing to a legal basis but if it's crowdsourced, then the inputs came from ordinary people. Sure, they signed to T&Cs.
Philosophically, I think knowledge, facts of the world as it is, even the constructed world, should be public knowledge not an asset class in itself.
Four Square just open sourced their places dataset. https://location.foursquare.com/resources/blog/products/four...
Given how expensive it is to query Google places, would love a crowdsourced open-source places API.
I’ve been saying this about Google Maps for years, especially their vast collection of public transport loading data and real time road speeds.
People are duped into thinking they’re doing some “greater good” by completing the in-app surveys and yet the data they give back is for Google’s exclusive use and, in fact, deepens their moat.
It's not solely for Google's benefit. They're ("we're" tbh) contributing data that improves services that we use. It has additional selfish and altruistic benefits beyond feeding the Googly beast.
IIRC Google maps basically does not make money. I wonder if there can be a government deal to subsidize it on the condition that the data be open sourced.
They made 11B$ last year. It has incredible amount of ads. If you haven't noticed, then that means they did a great job. (tip: look for the custom logo pins in the map. Its printing money)
1 reply →
Google maps would if it sold the data to Google. My guess is there is a line item for that or at least on paper for tax purposes.
As a Google maps user, I benefit from that data being in there.
No. it should be owned by the owners of the land on which these objects are located. You should be able to provide access at different levels of detail to public or private entities that need said access and revoke it at your own will. May be make some money out of it.
3D artist can create a model of a space and offer rights to the owner of the land, who in turn can choose to create his own model or use the one provided by an artist.
In the US at least, "facts of the world as it is" are not generally copyrightable, though any creative process in the presentation of them may be.
There's an "illegal child labor" angle to it, I suspect, T&Cs be damned.
Do you expect every company to release all their data to the public as well or it's just because you're not invested in this one?
I expect any company which collates information about geospatial datasets to release the substance of them, yes. Maybe there's an IPR lockup window, but at some point the cadastral facts of the world are part of the commons to me.
I would think there's actually a lot of epidemiology data which also should be winding up in the public domain getting locked up in medical IPR. I could make the same case. Cochrane reports rely on being able to do meta analysis over existing datasets. Thats value.
They found a creative way to incentivize the collection of it and paid for the processing. Anybody can collect the same data, I don't see why they would have to release it...
It would be nice of them though.