Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Private negotiations
Hi, Richard Fairhurst wrote: CONDITIONS FOR TIMSC TO RELICENSE HIS DATA (Version 1) This is an interesting document and the first time that I have seen *anybody*, including past and present members of OSMF board, draft such a detailed code of conduct if you will. There are some ideas in there that I would agreee with, maybe in a slightly softer wording, and I would hope that TimSC either stands for election to the board or becomes a member of the AoA group that is also trying to lay down some rules for the future of OSMF. It is unfortunate that TimSC tries to make OSMF reform a condition of his agreement to relicense his contribution. This is of course totally out of the question, and it is sad because even the good ideas in the document are tarnished by this attempt at coercion. One could almost say that now, even if OSMF were to implement some of the usable ideas in that document, they would forever have to defend themselves against the notion that they sold out just to keep a minuscle amount of data (data that is, if RichardF is to be believed, not even universally welcomed by other mappers on the ground). I suggest that TimSC's attempt at negotiation be categorically rejected without further ado; he should be treated exactly the same as any other mapper and if he doesn't reconsider then his contributions will have to be removed and, where desirable, remapped. No single individual can possibly have made a contribution that should allow them to, without even being elected, exert such influence on OSMF. (If TimSC is granted special treatment because of his personal contribution, then what even more special treatment would we have to afford entities like AND, Yahoo, or Bing who have done a lot for us?) At the same time, and even though this may sound conflicting, an effort should be made to involve TimSC in AoA discussions, or he should be encouraged to stand for election to the board, because see first two paragraphs. 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] Private negotiations
Frederik Ramm frederik@... writes: I suggest that TimSC's attempt at negotiation be categorically rejected without further ado; he should be treated exactly the same as any other mapper and if he doesn't reconsider then his contributions will have to be removed and, where desirable, remapped. No single individual can possibly have made a contribution that should allow them to, without even being elected, exert such influence on OSMF. I live and map in London and some of my contributions would be flushed down the pan if Tim declines to relicense. I agree completely with Frederik. -- Andrew ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
[OSM-legal-talk] Private negotiations.
Andrew said I live and map in London and some of my contributions would be flushed down the pan if Tim declines to relicense. I agree completely with Frederik. Exactly. In all this kerfuffle the only important thing is the CT. With them collaborative mapping is possible. Without them, as we are now seeing, collaborative mapping is not possible. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Private negotiations.
The problems with the CC-BY-SA license are fully hypothetical, as there have been no real life problems. There have been some hesitations at commercial users of OSM data with the Share Alike part, but OSM is not bound to enforce the SA part of the current license either, so we could just allow them to use data without SA. I do not feel any particular sympathy for the commercial users of our data to the extent that we need to jeopardize OSM just for their interests. My sympathy is with those who do not have access to data, such as in emergency situations. OSM was best in Haiti. No real problem has occurred with CC-BY-SA, and no initiative has done more harm to OSM in history than then the insisted proposal to change the license (-that-does-not-fit-:CC-BY-SA) to (-the-license-that-cannot-be-enforced-:ODBL) by (-the-people-that-do-not-own-OSM-). OSMF is playing a legal game with the interest of the community. Since months a lot of active mappers have stopped contributing just because of uncertainty about their data. Some of us try to minimize the number of refused CT (about 400) but I have the strong feeling that those are mainly found in the old core of the first 1000 of OSM mappers, the founders that were interested in real free data. The 102000 new signups that agreed with the CT probably just signed (but I cannot prove that) because they were not given a choice, nor knew about the history of OSM, and signed a CT just as they sign one upon installing a new piece of shareware / i-don't-care-ware. I almost fully support the reasoning of TIM, just do not understand why he tried this in private. He must have his reasons. Over all, the procedures of the introduction of ODBL and CT have a strong smell of -this-must-happen-regardless-what-and-who, without anyone mad really clear why this is absolutely necessary. Gert -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Rob Myers [mailto:r...@robmyers.org] Verzonden: donderdag 9 juni 2011 19:30 Aan: legal-talk@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Private negotiations. On 09/06/11 18:18, Nakor Osm wrote: This is wrong: remove the CTs and leave the database licensed as it is today and no data needs to be removed. The license today has problems. Both the license and the way that the license is chosen need to change. - Rob. ___ 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
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Private negotiations.
Gert Gremmen wrote: Some of us try to minimize the number of refused CT (about 400) but I have the strong feeling that those are mainly found in the old core of the first 1000 of OSM mappers, the founders that were interested in real free data. Wut? AFAIK the three contributors with the longest continuous pedigree in OSM (going by mailing list postings) are Steve, Matt and me, in that order. All three support ODbL+CT. Of the 397 people who have declined ODbL+CT, only two are within the first 1000 user ids. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/OSM-legal-talk-Private-negotiations-tp6457543p6460059.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
