Limitations on mapping private information

This page is under development (November 2020). It may not yet reflect community consensus.

Privacy

The freedom to map the world in OpenStreetMap has limitations, particularly when it violates the privacy of living people.

As an international project, we should respect personal information and the community's consensus regarding it.

OpenStreetMap has no method to record individual agreements for publishing specific personal data. Such data would not be verifiable anyway, so even with an individual agreement, it would not fit within OpenStreetMap's guidelines.

Therefore, the following rules apply:

• Do not map where individuals live; specifically, do not add the names of inhabitants to dwellings.

• OpenStreetMap is not a property registry; thus, do not map individual ownership of buildings or plots (see also: Parcel).

• OpenStreetMap is not a phone book. Do not map contact data of individuals. For mapped businesses and offices that are public record, adding contact information is acceptable.

• Do not name individuals in OpenStreetMap tags unless their name is displayed on a business sign visible from the street, is part of the business name, or is otherwise publicly available. For example, tagging operator=* based on data printed on receipts is normal.

• Do not map the personal behaviors, preferences, or habits of individuals.

• Limit the detail of mapping private backyards. As a guideline, permanently installed private swimming pools (add access=private as appropriate) or some structures in semi-public gardens are acceptable. More detailed information is likely to be not acceptable or borderline.

• Do not map personal possessions or their locations (like vehicles, TVs, washing machines, or the number of livestock belonging to a household); tags for such should be limited to communal use, e.g., a laundry facility at a campsite.

• Do not map personal private indoor facilities, such as showers and toilets in private apartments or houses.

• Mapping private buildings, private roads (including driveways), and private parking is completely acceptable. Add access=private as appropriate to roads, parking lots, etc. However, annoying artifacts may appear in applications like Pokémon Go with short driveways.

• Mapping rooftop solar panels on residential houses is also considered acceptable.

Who Has a Right to Privacy?

In many jurisdictions, only living human beings are considered to have a right to privacy. However, in some cases, legal entities may be afforded similar rights. The deceased generally do not enjoy these rights, even in countries subject to GDPR, although the privacy of their living relatives might be relevant.

General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)

With regard to GDPR, some types of personal information are subject to data protection, while others are not:

Protected:

• natural person information

Not protected:

• legal person information including the name and the form of the legal person and the contact details, i.e., company/office information like name, phone number, address, house number...
• deceased person information, although "Member States may provide for rules regarding the processing of personal data of deceased persons." in the context of cemetery=grave for example.

Other Reasons Not to Map

Beyond individual privacy, there may be other reasons not to map certain things outside the scope of this page. While a rough consensus exists on these, there are no written rules:

• Protection of endangered species. This would apply to, for example, mapping an eagle's nest or rare plants.
  • Mapping rare plants in a botanical garden would be fine (or perhaps not, see this on a Water Lily at Kew Gardens). Ultimately, discretion is still needed.
  • It is also considered fine to map existing roads/paths, if using them is forbidden; use access=no/access=private rather than deleting them.
• Safety concerns. This would apply to, for example, mapping the location of bank vaults, places in a business without security camera protection, safe houses for victims of domestic violence, or places of worship of a religion persecuted in a given region.
  • Such places will also not be signposted, so it goes hand in hand with verifiability. Note that a signposted place for victims of violence wants its location to be known, and mapping it would help, while mapping a secret safe house would cause problems - and would violate the verifiability rule.
• Indigenous sacred sites where the traditional owners and their representatives have asked that the locations of sites be kept private to protect them and maintain their sanctity.
• Note that some activities may be perfectly acceptable in OpenStreetMap but illegal in a given location. For example, in China, mapping without special permission is illegal. Mapping of China is done, acceptable, and welcome, but may pose a risk if you are in a China-controlled area.

Limitations

Note that this page does not list all things that are not mappable for privacy reasons. If something is not clearly covered by the rules above, there may still be a clear consensus on whether it is acceptable to map it—possibly due to privacy concerns.

Note also that this page is an attempt to document consensus; it is not a binding official decision.

See Also

This page is about respecting the privacy of individuals being mapped. For information regarding the data of OpenStreetMap users, members, and website visitors, see the Privacy Policy.

• Verifiability - for most private objects, this limitation also applies.
• Copyright
• Why we won't delete roads on private property

External Links

• https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/wege-auf-firmengelande/116928/11 - poll on a German forum demonstrating clear consensus that roads/footways/etc. on company property are mappable.