Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Phase 4 and what it means
Frederik Ramm wrote: > > Now I sense some uncertainty among mappers as to what phase 4 exactly > means for them. I know for a fact that among the current disagreeing > mappers there are some who intend to stay with OSM and who are just > holding out until the last minute; and I know there are some who simply > wanted to delay their decision until later. > Yes, there are a number of people who have declined to relicense as it is the only way available to formally voice ones disagreement with any of a) the new licence, b) the CT or c) the process. Nevertheless, they remain adamant supports and enthusiasts of OSM. Just that they happen to disagree with what is best for the project and without being able to see into the future it is pretty much impossible to say for sure which cause of action is the best for the project. So it is important to try and not alienate either side as much as possible. Phase 4 is critical in this respect, as it is the first time ones decision has actual consequences for mappers and starts locking users out of the project, some of whom have put a huge amount of effort into OSM to ensure it has become a success and deserve everyones respect. So it is bound to give bad blood and result in highly emotional debates. Frederik Ramm wrote: > > "Do not delete and re-map anything before . We will send out a > message to everyone who has not agreed to the license change, and inform > them that after that date, mappers are likely to purge non-relicensed > data and that if they want their data to remain, they need to redecide > before that date." > Out of the listed options, I would personally prefer this option most, as it imho leaves the most options open. However, rather than a specific date, I would advertise the "date" to be the time at which a critical mass is reached. I.e. when it becomes clear that sufficient data has successfully been relicensed that the damage due to data loss will be acceptable to the overall project. That then really is the point of no return at which one can start a graceful damage control by replacing no relicensable data. At that point I presume OSMF will decide on a formal date on which phase 5 will begin. In order to give all data users enough time to adapt to the new license and consider the consequences, I would expect OSMF to set this date at least a month or two in advance, which will then still give mappers a reasonable amount of time to start fixing up the holes that the relicensing process will produce in the data. Kai -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/OSM-legal-talk-Phase-4-and-what-it-means-tp6440812p6441026.html Sent from the Legal Talk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
[OSM-legal-talk] Phase 4 and what it means
Hi,
some time in the next months we're likely to start phase 4 of the
license change, where those who have not agreed to the new CT will be
unable to continue editing.
Someone who has not yet agreed can still change their mind after that of
course.
Now I sense some uncertainty among mappers as to what phase 4 exactly
means for them. I know for a fact that among the current disagreeing
mappers there are some who intend to stay with OSM and who are just
holding out until the last minute; and I know there are some who simply
wanted to delay their decision until later.
On the other hand I know that some mappers cannot wait for phase 4 to
begin because that's when they intend to systematically delete and
re-map everything that has not yet been relicensed.
Any misunderstanding in this area will lead to friction: mapper A
thought he still had time to reconsider; but mapper B goes ahead and
deletes/re-maps A's work (possibly with less precision or other things
that A doesn't like). A, who intended to stay with OSM but was just
playing a little game of stubbornness and protest, is infuriated ("how
could you throw away my super precise mapping!"), and B has wasted his time.
Then again, had B waited until one day before the switch to phase 5, and
had A decided not to relicense after all, then there would be a white
spot on the map which isn't too desirable either.
I think that we should come up with a clear message to mappers that we
issue AT THE SAME TIME as we announce phase 4. That message could either be:
"Do not delete and re-map anything before we go to phase 5 in 2012. We
know this will lead to blank spots on the map but that's not too bad."
or
"Before you delete and re-map anything, contact the mapper who hasn't
yet agreed and whose data you are planning to re-map, and explain to him
what you're going to do."
or
"Do not delete and re-map anything before . We will send out a
message to everyone who has not agreed to the license change, and inform
them that after that date, mappers are likely to purge non-relicensed
data and that if they want their data to remain, they need to redecide
before that date."
or whatever.
I am not advocating one of these procedures over the other; it is just
important to me that everyone is on the same page. Because currently
people are not; some thing that they have until phase 5 to reconsider,
and some already have twitchy fingers and will start purging
non-relicensed data as soon as we say "phase 4". (Well some are already
purging non-relicensed data now but everybody advises against.)
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Is mail address le...@osmfoundation.org valid?
Hi Jukka, Yes, it is still in use and we read everything and we we do try to respond. Have we missed something? Mike License Working Group On 04/06/2011 06:57, Jukka Rahkonen wrote: Hi, The page http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Groups#Licensing_Working_Group suggests that the licensing working group members should be reading posts sent to a group address le...@osmfoundation.org. Is that address still in use? -Jukka Rahkonen- ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
