Re: [OSM-legal-talk] I want my access back
Hi, On 09.08.2011 22:43, 80n wrote: Expecting the crowd to go and re-map stuff wholesale, for somebody else's benefit is just absurd, it's never going to happen. You're wrong with this. At least in the country I'm most active the transition to ODbL ready data is making huge progress. And it's not someone else's benefit, but a benefit for the whole community. The data is not simply replaced, but mostly improved by having more high-resolution imagery available. You can read the whole success story in the forum. Stephan ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] I want my access back
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 7:38 AM, Stephan Knauss o...@stephans-server.dewrote: Hi, On 09.08.2011 22:43, 80n wrote: Expecting the crowd to go and re-map stuff wholesale, for somebody else's benefit is just absurd, it's never going to happen. You're wrong with this. At least in the country I'm most active the transition to ODbL ready data is making huge progress. And it's not someone else's benefit, but a benefit for the whole community. The data is not simply replaced, but mostly improved by having more high-resolution imagery available. You can read the whole success story in the forum. What's your estimate for how long it is going to take? ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] I want my access back
Hi, On 08/10/11 08:38, Stephan Knauss wrote: You're wrong with this. At least in the country I'm most active the transition to ODbL ready data is making huge progress. And it's not someone else's benefit, but a benefit for the whole community. I, too, am positively surprised by the speed and diligence with which mappers all over the place are working towards getting ready for the big switch. Most had held back initially to give people a chance to reconsider, but now things are really moving, and with a very positive attitude at that - it's not grumble grumble grumble why do we have to do this but we're doing our part to put OSM on a solid legal footing, cleaning up behind those whom we couldn't persuade. For this, it is obviously very important *not* to allow any further CC-BY-SA contributions as those would give people a sense of fighting against windmills. Everyone is working to bring the amount of non-relicensable contributions down to zero; adding more non-relicensable contributions would not only pull the rope in the other direction, it would also ruin the spirits of everyone working to fix things. Bye Frederik ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] I want my access back
It's OSM that obliges users to contribute CC-BY-SA and it's OSM that obliges users to contribute ODBL. But many of us want to contribute PD and do not want to comply with any CT at all. PD data does not need a complicated and binding CT as the current one. And the current situation is not possible to contribute PD data at all. So the situation would have been much improved if there were a sign up as PD user with a very simple PD-CT. Gert -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Frederik Ramm [mailto:frede...@remote.org] Verzonden: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 9:15 AM Aan: legal-talk@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] I want my access back Hi, On 08/10/11 08:38, Stephan Knauss wrote: You're wrong with this. At least in the country I'm most active the transition to ODbL ready data is making huge progress. And it's not someone else's benefit, but a benefit for the whole community. I, too, am positively surprised by the speed and diligence with which mappers all over the place are working towards getting ready for the big switch. Most had held back initially to give people a chance to reconsider, but now things are really moving, and with a very positive attitude at that - it's not grumble grumble grumble why do we have to do this but we're doing our part to put OSM on a solid legal footing, cleaning up behind those whom we couldn't persuade. For this, it is obviously very important *not* to allow any further CC-BY-SA contributions as those would give people a sense of fighting against windmills. Everyone is working to bring the amount of non-relicensable contributions down to zero; adding more non-relicensable contributions would not only pull the rope in the other direction, it would also ruin the spirits of everyone working to fix things. Bye Frederik ___ 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] I want my access back
It's not just remapping that effects this, we are still seeing between 60-100 pre-CTs signups accepting the CTs per day without any indication of this slowing down. I expect a couple of 10'000 more before we actually relicense. Simon Am 10.08.2011 09:16, schrieb 80n: On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 7:38 AM, Stephan Knauss o...@stephans-server.de mailto:o...@stephans-server.de wrote: Hi, On 09.08.2011 22:43, 80n wrote: Expecting the crowd to go and re-map stuff wholesale, for somebody else's benefit is just absurd, it's never going to happen. You're wrong with this. At least in the country I'm most active the transition to ODbL ready data is making huge progress. And it's not someone else's benefit, but a benefit for the whole community. The data is not simply replaced, but mostly improved by having more high-resolution imagery available. You can read the whole success story in the forum. What's your estimate for how long it is going to take? ___ 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] I want my access back
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:50 AM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote: PD data does not need a complicated and binding CT as the current one. True. But PD is forward compatible with the CTs. For example, we did not need to ask the upstream authors of TIGER to accept the CTs. PD is not backward compatible with the CTs. But that's a complicated subject that was discussed many times and I'd rather avoid it. And the current situation is not possible to contribute PD data at all. So the situation would have been much improved if there were a sign up as PD user with a very simple PD-CT. Gert -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Frederik Ramm [mailto:frede...@remote.org] Verzonden: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 9:15 AM Aan: legal-talk@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] I want my access back Hi, On 08/10/11 08:38, Stephan Knauss wrote: You're wrong with this. At least in the country I'm most active the transition to ODbL ready data is making huge progress. And it's not someone else's benefit, but a benefit for the whole community. I, too, am positively surprised by the speed and diligence with which mappers all over the place are working towards getting ready for the big switch. Most had held back initially to give people a chance to reconsider, but now things are really moving, and with a very positive attitude at that - it's not grumble grumble grumble why do we have to do this but we're doing our part to put OSM on a solid legal footing, cleaning up behind those whom we couldn't persuade. For this, it is obviously very important *not* to allow any further CC-BY-SA contributions as those would give people a sense of fighting against windmills. Everyone is working to bring the amount of non-relicensable contributions down to zero; adding more non-relicensable contributions would not only pull the rope in the other direction, it would also ruin the spirits of everyone working to fix things. Bye Frederik ___ 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 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] I want my access back
Am 10.08.2011 11:29, schrieb Nic Roets: On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:50 AM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmeng.grem...@cetest.nl wrote: PD data does not need a complicated and binding CT as the current one. True. But PD is forward compatible with the CTs. For example, we did not need to ask the upstream authors of TIGER to accept the CTs. That is naturally the case because we have a well known source and formal reasons to be very sure that the data is actually really PD in the case of the TIGER data. In the case of an individual mappers contribution we have a very different situation where essentially we would need the same level of agreement as the current CTs. Simon ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] I want my access back
To all It's all a matter of trust. A) Trusting contributors and b) trusting the users of OSM data. The current policy of OSM is to trust nobody, and therefore OSM(F) is seeking legal certainty, by creating licenses and contributor terms. It will probably take a long time for those seeking this way that it is a way without issue. First because legal certainty does not exist in a society where justice is dominated by (financial) power. ( see Dominique Strauss Kahn case for a recent example ) Second because the legal certainty created by the CT is uncertain because it is badly written, and one needs not be a specialist to understand that; and the use of OdBl is so unprecedented that we are completely unclear if it will hold in ANY case but the simplest. Third because we don't not have the financial means to maintain the license in even the smallest case. OSMF will probably go bankrupt on the first case against an fraudulent user of the data. You ever read the story of the emperor's new clothes ? (=read CT) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emperor%27s_New_Clothes That is what comes to mind if we look at OSM legal position. And that is how the whole world is looking at us (if they actually do matter to look) I a world where legal certainty dominates trust, justice is far away, and that is what's happening now. Gert -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Simon Poole [mailto:si...@poole.ch] Verzonden: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 11:43 AM Aan: legal-talk@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] I want my access back Am 10.08.2011 11:29, schrieb Nic Roets: On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:50 AM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmeng.grem...@cetest.nl wrote: PD data does not need a complicated and binding CT as the current one. True. But PD is forward compatible with the CTs. For example, we did not need to ask the upstream authors of TIGER to accept the CTs. That is naturally the case because we have a well known source and formal reasons to be very sure that the data is actually really PD in the case of the TIGER data. In the case of an individual mappers contribution we have a very different situation where essentially we would need the same level of agreement as the current CTs. Simon ___ 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] I want my access back
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 8:15 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: Hi, On 08/10/11 08:38, Stephan Knauss wrote: You're wrong with this. At least in the country I'm most active the transition to ODbL ready data is making huge progress. And it's not someone else's benefit, but a benefit for the whole community. I, too, am positively surprised by the speed and diligence with which mappers all over the place are working towards getting ready for the big switch. What are you looking at that provides this information? Or is it just anecdotal? Most had held back initially to give people a chance to reconsider, but now things are really moving, and with a very positive attitude at that - it's not grumble grumble grumble why do we have to do this but we're doing our part to put OSM on a solid legal footing, cleaning up behind those whom we couldn't persuade. For this, it is obviously very important *not* to allow any further CC-BY-SA contributions as those would give people a sense of fighting against windmills. Everyone is working to bring the amount of non-relicensable contributions down to zero; adding more non-relicensable contributions would not only pull the rope in the other direction, it would also ruin the spirits of everyone working to fix things. Agreed. fosm.org is the place for CC-BY-SA contributions. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] I want my access back
Florian Lohoff schrieb: More interestingly - Why on earth cant i contribute although i stated that all my contributions can be considered CC0/Public Domain? Why do i need to accept the CT, granting some spooky special rights to some folks i dont know and who definitly not act in my name. If all your contributions can be considered CC0/PD, then you grant all right to everybody who wants to use the data, so your statements are definitely in conflict with themselves. Nobody in our friendly OSM community can help your resolve the problem of not agreeing with yourself. ;-) Robert Kaiser ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] I want my access back
Hi, On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 05:07:15PM +0200, Robert Kaiser wrote: Florian Lohoff schrieb: More interestingly - Why on earth cant i contribute although i stated that all my contributions can be considered CC0/Public Domain? Why do i need to accept the CT, granting some spooky special rights to some folks i dont know and who definitly not act in my name. If all your contributions can be considered CC0/PD, then you grant all right to everybody who wants to use the data, so your statements are definitely in conflict with themselves. Nobody in our friendly OSM community can help your resolve the problem of not agreeing with yourself. ;-) Guess what - I dont trust the OSMF - In the past the OSMF has decided to relicense, decided to use the ODBL and decided upon the CT. In no way the contributers have been asked - the people who actually did the work. So why should i grant special rights to the OSMF via the CT? A good point about the CC-BY-SA, CC0, PD, GPL or BSD is that everybody gets the same rights. Not so with the current relicensing. With stating that my contributions are PD/CC0 i grant everybody the same rights. The OSMF has stated that they going to delete my contributions as i refused to grant special rights to the OSMF. Does this only sound suspicious for me? Flo -- Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] I want my access back
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de wrote: Guess what - I dont trust the OSMF - In the past the OSMF has decided +1 But when you contribute under an open license, you must make peace that some downstream users will use it in some unintended ways. For example the spirit of the GPL2 being circumvented by bootloaders checking digital signatures, or online service providers not sharing the improvements they made to the Linux kernel. to relicense, decided to use the ODBL and decided upon the CT. In no way the contributers have been asked - the people who actually did the work. So why should i grant special rights to the OSMF via the CT? A good point about the CC-BY-SA, CC0, PD, GPL or BSD is that everybody gets the same rights. Not so with the current relicensing. With stating that my contributions are PD/CC0 i grant everybody the same rights. The OSMF has stated that they going to delete my contributions as i refused to grant special rights to the OSMF. Does this only sound suspicious for me? Flo -- Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iQIVAwUBTkLVEpDdQSDLCfIvAQivpA/7BIv6SrfMU1yO3lse+QTNFiwYDdfjVjsu FNWkuaf6PjUynpfAdwZVpMFRY5oR9o5fuuvGGu++2mdyzAHGgdIlLQ19zvSKWMYL jeouXSQqSmu4wETNw4GsbBuHQruZ7VsUSqvBbyT0RMaActbaJ864feNQRvzywHT0 4DX8/ozw2ypLwWEuf/TMKOHTf0Zlsab+jm9MZxGD/S7TBw+uJ78z9PIEWinw2/ov yoPnvflJA2rL4LE7UujfxilHOtbkaq3Ec9atOZ411J2tZB5e2Ozjx6MC8H2TDwEI qinU5FzgigCNwic5sGVGdtXYMll5zJx/Tr5Tix02JkCbMTsAJGa2+Ar+/E9kM9QB 7bbyewkOtWND8KI1z7QecVaSKP0q5x4zo5tjXfbZtXpBwY4K116rBcoa4oVCCIwc kxSEsM0ZMmFD878gh/LffoM/25IQTofvxXWIQM2w9xN1ChD8Ay2zZd+KXaDIXLBW s6dEM0jvYUuG6gMtCjpoRfzXWoke6k2Mf+M5eqobVf4CC4/4SvhJ+MhHzyAxIVsF ZyckKJhIjN4w7RTscb0DvwJ10qpA0vzcYo2/75tWHHYuUfplssB5yllpXxSdR9mj r2+JmkCUti4V+ZhJ3LsCAVmolBVXsuGl1ZnRPax9kHDlAiNujZrP3iv+5WAUHZRP LjFobQmFn7Q= =cc7h -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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] I want my access back
Gert Gremmen wrote: OSM promised me that my contributions to be removed in the process to OdBL. That did not happen. Nor has a OdBL version of the OSM database been launched. Did you ever try to understand anything about the licence change at all? Did you read about the process e.g. in the wiki? And are you aware which phase of the process of the licence change is currently ongoing? It doesn't seem to be, otherwise you would not write such a nonsens like that! Sorry for this tough words, but ... \|||/ (o o) ,~~~ooO~~(_)~, | Please | | don't feed the | | TROLL! | '~~ooO~~~' |__|__| || || ooO Ooo [PLONK] Best regards, Michael. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] I want my access back
Op 10-08-11 12:33, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen schreef: To all It's all a matter of trust. A) Trusting contributors and b) trusting the users of OSM data. The current policy of OSM is to trust nobody, and therefore OSM(F) is seeking legal certainty, by creating licenses and contributor terms. Have you actually *read* the CT? Trust nobody? The OSMF asks of its contributors that they only contribute stuf which they are allowed to. The OSMF promises that the collective will always be published with a free and open license. Just for fun: try reading the Terms of Service of Google, to which you agree every time you use one of its services. It will probably take a long time for those seeking this way that it is a way without issue. First because legal certainty does not exist in a society where justice is dominated by (financial) power. ( see Dominique Strauss Kahn case for a recent example ) What has this to do with OSM? Second because the legal certainty created by the CT is uncertain because it is badly written, and one needs not be a specialist to understand that; and the use of OdBl is so unprecedented that we are completely unclear if it will hold in ANY case but the simplest. Do you claim that CC-BY-SA does not need a specialist to understand it? Third because we don't not have the financial means to maintain the license in even the smallest case. Like mentioned before, we're not maintaining the license. ODbL is maintained by Open Data Commons, whereas the CC is maintained by Creative Commons. Not the OSMF. OSMF will probably go bankrupt on the first case against an fraudulent user of the data. Are you suggesting that with sticking with CC-BY-SA we don't have such a problem? (if we have it at all) You ever read the story of the emperor's new clothes ? (=read CT) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emperor%27s_New_Clothes I know the story. However, another story comes to mind with me. Ever read the parable of the ten virgins? It's about being prepared for what's coming. The OSMF is taking actions needed to keep the project running for years to come. Gert Henk Oh, wait a minute... In a previous message you made it perfectly clear you don't trust me Why am I even replying ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] I want my access back
Am 11.08.2011 01:50, schrieb Henk Hoff: ... Just for fun: try reading the Terms of Service of Google, to which you agree every time you use one of its services. I normally refer to http://wikimapia.org/terms_reference.html for ToS for something similar to OSM. Simon ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
