On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 12:36:57PM +1200, Joseph Gentle wrote:
> I agree with all of this. I don't want to confuse the issues; but I do
> want more data about the opinions of average mappers than an argument
> on the internet can provide.
>
> I am unfortunately frustrated with the foundation. To be able to say
> that OSM will never go PD, there must be data.
>
> If a poll were given to the community, I think it should look like this:
>
>
> Some people have different ideas of what 'free' should mean for our maps.
>
> Do you prefer that we:
> (o) Place no restrictions on the use of the map data [link to PD stuff]
> (o) Force anyone using maps based on OpenStreetMaps to share their
> improvements back to the community [link to SA stuff]
>
> [x] I believe so strongly about this that I would contribute less to
> the project based on what model of freedom it supports
>
> Further discussion of the pros and cons of each of these models can be
> found here [link].
Unfortunately its not that easy. The whole thing is *not* about the two
different models. Its about the different models as *implemented in
reality*. Licenses don't work by wishful thinking. You can't say:
philosophically I want this and this is what we'll put into the license.
You'll have to fit it in the framework of the worldwide legal system
with its many national implementations.
Most of the problems I see around the issue are not about whether
share-alike is good or bad, but about the concrete meaning of
share-alike in our context and about the implementation of those
meanings into an actual workable license. Any license will have some
drawbacks and some good sides. Any license will solve some problems and
create others. The important thing is to find a balance, to find a
solution that works for most of the cases, as solution that feels right
to the OSM contributors and that works in a legal sense and works in
practice.
The proposed license opens many questions in my mind. I can't properly
see the consequences yet. I have asked some of these questions on this
list and haven't gotten satisfactory answers. Maybe the problems that I
see aren't there, and somebody just has to explain it to me or change
some wording in the license to make it clear. Maybe the problems are
there and can be solved. But maybe they can't.
Maybe we are trying to solve a complex problem by making it more complex
still. And that seems not to be the best approach. OpenStreetMap itself
has shown that the approach of using the "simplest thing that could
possibly work" (Ward Cunningham) is a good way of thinking about a
project. There were many people who were convinced that the simplistic
OSM database schema and free tagging by untrained volunteers could never
amount to anything. But they were wrong. OSM works brilliantly. Maybe
we shouldn't try to create two interdependent licenses tieing together
three different legal fields (copyright, database law, contract law) in
an international context, something that (as far as I know) nobody has
ever attempted. Maybe we should not try to be perfect, maybe we should
not try to solve all the worlds legal problems in one go. Maybe we have
to learn to let go, to not want to control everything. The same way we
learned to do that on the technical/community level.
So, to sum this up. In your questionaire I currently want to choose:
[x] I think share-alike is good in principle and somehow would like to
retain it. But I am unsure how it could and should work in our context.
I see the problems with the current license and I see the problems with
the proposed license (click-through needed, very unclear rules on
forcing you to open derivative databases) and after many month of
discussions can't see any progress on those issues and so have to
conclude that the only option to get this resolved in a reasonable
amount of time and in a way that people can actually understand and
easily use in the real world is to go PD.
Can I please have the option in your questionnaire? :-)
Jochen
--
Jochen Topf [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.remote.org/jochen/ +49-721-388298
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
