[Geojson] GeoJSON '1.0'?

Daniel Morissette dmorissette at mapgears.com
Thu Mar 13 07:15:48 PDT 2008


Christopher Schmidt wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 01:55:25PM -0000, Martin Daly wrote:
>> I'm not sure that this is a trademark issue.  Isn't it this part of the
>> usage terms (http://www.epsg.org/CurrentDB.html#use) the bit that
>> matters:
>>
>> "No data that has been modified other than as permitted in these terms
>> and conditions shall be described as or attributed to the EPSG dataset."
>>
>> Although... GeoJSON could not be described as supplying or modifying the
>> data, merely referencing it with caveats.
> 
> Yeah, I don't think this is relevant. It seems clear from context that
> "No data that has been modified other than as permitted in these terms
> and conditions shall be described as or attributed to the EPSG dataset."
> is about the *EPSG* data: using a number combined with the string EPSG
> doesn't count at all, in my opinion. If that's really the basis of the
> complaint, then this is a whole lot of hooey, as far as I'm concerned.
> 


Your use of the letters E, P, S and G as a string prefixing a number 
must have some kind of meaning in the GeoJSON context related to the 
database to which this license applies, otherwise you'd use ABCD and not 
EPSG as the prefix.

What I mean is that it's not as obvious as you seem to suggest that your 
use of the letters EPSG is not linked to the data in the database. You 
may not be redistributing the data, but you allude to it and suggest an 
override to its meaning ... once you do that you get in a grey area and 
you're not completely disconnected from the data and its license.

My 0.02$

Daniel
-- 
Daniel Morissette
http://www.mapgears.com/


More information about the Geojson mailing list