4 ms·
N.b., it's the stated policy of OpenStreetMap to not take information from Google... not primarily out of zealotry, but because Google's terms of service confli
by jmkb 7y ago
N.b., it's the stated policy of OpenStreetMap to not take information from Google... not primarily out of zealotry, but because Google's terms of service conflict with the ODBL license, and they don't want the organisation in legal trouble.
Normally this means no copying from Google Maps or Google's satellite or street-level imagery. (It also means no using Google's geocoding API if you have addresses that you want to add, but don't know where they should be added -- low-budget SEO companies tend to do this a lot.)
Using Google Translate -- and not even to translate, but just as a way to get copy-pastable handwriting recognition -- is a greyer area, but I probably would still recommend avoiding it. But nor do I know of any free alternatives offhand.
- privong 7y ago> Normally this means no copying from Google Maps or Google's satellite or street-level imagery. Just to note for general use that the standard web-editor for OSM pulls in Bing satellite imagery. So one can use satellite imagery without having to rely on Google or risk that type of legal issue.
- maxerickson 7y agoThere's several different satellite/aerial mosaics available. They often differ in resolution and freshness, so it pays to check which one best matches what you are trying to map. Maxar (formerly DigitalGlobe), Mapbox and ESRI are additional global layers, and in many places there are local imagery sources that can be both the highest quality and the freshest.
- _jomo 7y agoAlso, in my experience address locations on Google Maps are often very inaccurate, so it's not even a good source.