When mapping buildings, I’ll switch between the ESRI and Bing satellite maps, since they both offer different “freshnes” and clarity, depending on the area.

However, when I use my official municipal or regional websites, they have ESRI maps that appear to be quite a bit newer.

Is the licensing different across different ESRI imagery sources, or could I use the more updated one as a guideline?

EDIT: I think I found my answer from the official OpenStreetMap Wiki:

" Esri is a corporate member of the Foundation."

“Esri allowed the usage of Esri World Imagery (and its variants) in OSM mapping, without restrictions and requirements. Even attribution is not legally required.”

This is wonderful news! Having satellite images from only a few months ago, rather than a few years ago, is a game-changer!

So this might have been overly optimistic. There may be additional licensing restrictions on variants outside what’s available in the OSM editor.

  • pietervdvn@lemmy.mlM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    7 days ago

    NOT all ESRI imagery can be used. Their maps are probably copyrighted; and a background satellite view seen in an ESRI-product (which your municipality happens to use) is not necessarily cleared for usage, even though it happens to be shown in an ESRI prodcuct…

  • Simon Poole@en.osm.town
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    @Showroom7561 you seem to be jumping to conclusions a bit there. Yes we are allowed to use Esri World Imagery in its two variants, there is no permission for anything else.

    PS: there have been cases were Imagery was available in the Esri imagery referenced above that wasn’t legally available for use to us elsewhere, in the cases that I tracked it ‘suddenly’ vanished after a while.

  • Fisch@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    I live in Germany and I can select my official regional source right in the editor. Maybe it’s a licencing issue but maybe it just wasn’t added because no one ever brought up that it exists. I don’t know where people suggest imagery sources to be added but maybe you could find that out and see if anyone’s suggested it before and if not, suggest it yourself. Either way, you should be able to use that source without any legal issues, you’re not redestributing it.