Re: [OSM-talk] Cloudmade: We are the Wikipedia of maps
Mark Boslet, the Editor of Techpulse360 has modified the article to correct any misimpression. The title is now OpenStreetMap wants to be the Wikipedia of Maps and the body of the article now clearly distinguishes between CloudMade and us. 80n On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 11:14 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: Hi, as an OSM community member, I'm taking offence at the following article: http://techpulse360.com/2009/03/10/startup-cloudmade-wants-to-be-the-wikipedia-of-maps/ The article says that Cloudmade relies on its OpenStreetMap project, and: “This is going to be the map of the future,” says founder Steve Coast of his company. “We’re the Wikipedia of maps.” This is of course wrong; OpenStreetMap is no Cloudmade's project, and Cloudmade is not the Wikipedia of maps. Further down, the article suggests that Cloudmade money was somehow related to mapping the world: But it’s also a daunting task. The company raised $3.5 million from Sunstone Capital, but, well, the world is a large place. And: Coast says the goal is to give away the mapping data for free and charge for services. Of course, there is no mapping data that Cloudmade could give away for free because they don't own any. I know that the press always write what they want (or what they think they understand) and not necessarily what you tell them. Also, to their credit, the Cloudmade web page clearly and correctly states that We source our map data from OpenStreetMap, the community mapping project which is making a free map of the world. However, this is not the first time that the OpenStreetMap project has been confused with Cloudmade by the press, and I can hardly imagine that whoever wrote that article did so without relying on Cloudmade statements that somehow pointed in that direction. I would appreciate if Cloudmade PR people, especially in the US, would take more care in explaining the situation to the press, or if that is too much to ask, then at least refrain from misrepresenting the situation. If anyone is the Wikipedia of maps then it is the OpenStreetMap project which exists independently of Cloudmade. A very tiny portion of OpenStreetMap data is acquired during Cloudmade-sponsored events for which the project is grateful, but that does not give Cloudmade the right to act as if they own the project. I know that in the early days of the web, some access providers touted their dial-in plans as if the web was theirs - buy our package and get access to all these cool sites. Maybe it is hard for the public to understand, but an effort should be made to say that Cloudmade is an access provider, not a content provider. I'll try to make it a habit to point this out in the comment boxes of the relevant web pages if I see articles like that. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Cloudmade: We are the Wikipedia of maps
... never-the-less we should start tagging lamp-posts so we can easily find somewhere to hang those filthy cloudmade running dogs. ;-) On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 11:44 AM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote: Mark Boslet, the Editor of Techpulse360 has modified the article to correct any misimpression. The title is now OpenStreetMap wants to be the Wikipedia of Maps and the body of the article now clearly distinguishes between CloudMade and us. 80n On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 11:14 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: Hi, as an OSM community member, I'm taking offence at the following article: http://techpulse360.com/2009/03/10/startup-cloudmade-wants-to-be-the-wikipedia-of-maps/ The article says that Cloudmade relies on its OpenStreetMap project, and: “This is going to be the map of the future,” says founder Steve Coast of his company. “We’re the Wikipedia of maps.” This is of course wrong; OpenStreetMap is no Cloudmade's project, and Cloudmade is not the Wikipedia of maps. Further down, the article suggests that Cloudmade money was somehow related to mapping the world: But it’s also a daunting task. The company raised $3.5 million from Sunstone Capital, but, well, the world is a large place. And: Coast says the goal is to give away the mapping data for free and charge for services. Of course, there is no mapping data that Cloudmade could give away for free because they don't own any. I know that the press always write what they want (or what they think they understand) and not necessarily what you tell them. Also, to their credit, the Cloudmade web page clearly and correctly states that We source our map data from OpenStreetMap, the community mapping project which is making a free map of the world. However, this is not the first time that the OpenStreetMap project has been confused with Cloudmade by the press, and I can hardly imagine that whoever wrote that article did so without relying on Cloudmade statements that somehow pointed in that direction. I would appreciate if Cloudmade PR people, especially in the US, would take more care in explaining the situation to the press, or if that is too much to ask, then at least refrain from misrepresenting the situation. If anyone is the Wikipedia of maps then it is the OpenStreetMap project which exists independently of Cloudmade. A very tiny portion of OpenStreetMap data is acquired during Cloudmade-sponsored events for which the project is grateful, but that does not give Cloudmade the right to act as if they own the project. I know that in the early days of the web, some access providers touted their dial-in plans as if the web was theirs - buy our package and get access to all these cool sites. Maybe it is hard for the public to understand, but an effort should be made to say that Cloudmade is an access provider, not a content provider. I'll try to make it a habit to point this out in the comment boxes of the relevant web pages if I see articles like that. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk -- Tel: +44(0) 7814 517 807 -- Tel: +44(0) 7814 517 807 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Cloudmade: We are the Wikipedia of maps
Hi, 2009/3/11 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org: as an OSM community member, I'm taking offence at the following article: http://techpulse360.com/2009/03/10/startup-cloudmade-wants-to-be-the-wikipedia-of-maps/ The article says that Cloudmade relies on its OpenStreetMap project, and: [factual errors, confusing OSM and Cloudmade] As a long time member of the Wikimedia Press Team and also beeing responsible for the Wikia press work, I *really* do know that journalists can mix up things and write whatever they like with little connection to what you have told them. Especially they do like mixing up Wikia and Wikipedia and how these two projects are connected. This is neither wanted by Wikipedians, nor by Wikia. So what can you do about this if it happens to often? Besides stressing this topics whenever we talk to press people, we created a short QA about the typical topics which are often reported inaccuratly. This QA is given to any journalist we talk to and is also included at the bottom of press releases. For the topic mentioned above this looks like this: --[snip]-- Relationships between Wikimedia and Wikia To avoid confusion, please be aware of what Wikia is and what Wikia is not. * Wikia is not a Wikimedia project. * Wikia is not a for-profit arm of Wikipedia * Wikia is not a sister project of Wikipedia. The Wikimedia Foundation is a non-profit organization which manages Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects. Wikia is not a Wikimedia project. Wikia is run by a separate company, Wikia, Inc., which is independent of the Wikimedia Foundation, and therefore independent of Wikipedia. --[snap]-- ...and even then some journalists still don't get it - in this cases we contact them afterwards and try to get the errors fixed. So if this confusion between Cloudmade and OSM will happen again in the future, perhaps a QA for journalists may mitigate the problem. And for the readers: Don't believe that everything you read in an article/interview is reported accurately - and feel free to reach out to the editor! Bye, Tim. -- http://wikipedistik.de ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Cloudmade: We are the Wikipedia of maps
And you can't always blame the journalists, either. Once they send their copy in, the editors can have a go at it as well. I've seen perfectly good and factual articles become very inaccurate as the editors try and make it fit in half the space with bit of cut and paste. You'd think these days the online version would at least be the longer, hopefully more accurate version, but that's not always the case. Stephen 2009/3/11 Tim 'avatar' Bartel openstreet...@computerkultur.org: As a long time member of the Wikimedia Press Team and also beeing responsible for the Wikia press work, I *really* do know that journalists can mix up things and write whatever they like with little connection to what you have told them. Especially they do like mixing up Wikia and Wikipedia and how these two projects are connected. This is neither wanted by Wikipedians, nor by Wikia. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Cloudmade: We are the Wikipedia of maps
Stephen Hope wrote: And you can't always blame the journalists, either. Once they send their copy in, the editors can have a go at it as well. If I may speak up for editors, a lot of journalists could avoid this unfortunate necessity by Actually Learning To Write. cheers Richard (Incidentally, Tim is absolutely right: good, clear 'Notes to Editors' at the end of releases are the way to go.) -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Cloudmade%3A-%22We-are-the-Wikipedia-of-maps%22-tp22445658p22452008.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Cloudmade: We are the Wikipedia of maps
Frederik Ramm wrote: I, too, am an active member of the OSM community and entitled to voice my opinion in this capacity. Since when is OSM a platform for voicing opinions? Is it suddenly a democracy? We're here to make maps. You have to explain how your rants help the project. The impression I get is that you cause division rather than unity. Is that your goal? I know you have done an excellent job in mapping, in promoting OSM in Germany, written an excellent book now in its 2nd edition, and manage the Geofabrik company. But people who don't know this and only read your posts to this list might get the impression that your main goal is to nail Steve Coast. That seems destructive and irrational. If you want the public to understand the difference between OpenStreetMap and Cloudmade, this goal can not be achieved with your current rants. It would be far more efficient if you were to promote Geofabrik. Use this list, not for spam, but to once in a while tell us what Geofabrik has been up to lately. I think it is only normal for me to feel offended if an article makes it sound If you take personal offense by blogs and newspaper articles, that's your personal problem. The common cure is to become a cynic to anything that journalists write. If, on the other side, you can demonstrate that your efforts to promote OSM in Germany were hurt by this very article, then we need this journalist to correct this article. The main question is: Is your aim to air your personal feelings, or to help the project? -- Lars Aronsson (l...@aronsson.se) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Cloudmade: We are the Wikipedia of maps
This is coming from me as a long-term OSM contributer and CloudMade founder. First, its great that the overall tone of this thread is positive. It sounds like lots of people have experienced journalists misinterpreting things. In fact, the problem isn't journalists - I explain OSM, and particularly OSM + CloudMade to people everyday. Its quite a complex message to get across the first time. From a CloudMade perspective - we are absolutely looking at how CloudMade people represent OSM + CloudMade to the public and the press. There are two things I want to draw attention to. First, I really don't like the suggestion that anyone from CloudMade is mis-representing the situation. That is just not true. If anyone in the community feels that OSM is being mis-represented by anything anyone from CloudMade has said or done, then email me (n...@cloudmade.com) Steve (st...@cloudmade.com), Andy ( a...@cloudmade.com) or Jim (j...@cloudmade.com) and we'll look into it and let you know the outcome. Second, the fact is that CloudMade as a company is, and has been doing a lot to help OSM over the last few years. For the last two years, a large amount of both mine and Steve's time has been spent building and enabling OSM. For example, API 0.4 was developed largely by Steve and then tested and completed largely by Steve and me. Countless other OSM server improvements have been made possible because CloudMade people have found ways to make it happen. Multimap sponsorship ( http://www.opengeodata.org/?p=109), RightMove sponsorship ( http://www.opengeodata.org/?p=204) and countless other hours of OSM effort have been made possible by the efforts of CloudMade people. The huge number of talks, meetings and conferences that CloudMade people have participated in have been overwhelmingly positive for OpenStreetMap. This started with Steve and me and now includes the work of Andy, Matt, Shaun and Harry - all CloudMade developers who are working on API 0.6 in CloudMade time. Everyone at CloudMade is well aware that the community is the most important part of a project like OSM. So to help support the community we host OSM hack weekends, mapping parties in the EU and US, conferences (not just SOTM, but FOSS4G, Society of Cartographers and others) provide free hosting for CycleMap tiles that are heavily used by OSM and third party sites and donated significantly to the new OSM server. Because Steve and I knew that we couldn't think of everything to help OSM ourselves, we even set up a grants program to invite people ask for any kind of help with OSM projects. In addition, all CloudMade's commercial products like routing, geocoding and tile serving have been offered to the OSM-F for free use on OpenStreetMap.org. As for mapping parties, we have a team of 5 Community Ambassadors - Sarah, Russ, Hurricane, Dirk and Matt - who are working on overdrive to map the US. If you saw the passion and dedication of this team - not only for CloudMade but for OpenStreetMap and everything that the OpenStreetMap project stands for, you'd be amazed. What I'd ask is that the OSM community, particularly community leaders, look beyond slip-ups like the quotes in this article, and look at the enormous benefits that the involvement of organizations like CloudMade, GeoFabrik, ITO, AND and many of the other for-profit companies who are using OSM data can bring to the project. Hold these contributions up with the contributions of the other OSM leaders - the super mappers, coders and OSM-F members how pour unknown hours into creating OSM. I'd also really ask that anyone who has any questions, doubts or suspicions about CloudMade's role in relation to OSM speak to CloudMade people directly. There are a lot of us! We'd be happy to talk over email, Skype or even better meet in person. Happy mapping, Nick n...@cloudmade.com twitter.com/nick_b On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 10:08 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.netwrote: Stephen Hope wrote: And you can't always blame the journalists, either. Once they send their copy in, the editors can have a go at it as well. If I may speak up for editors, a lot of journalists could avoid this unfortunate necessity by Actually Learning To Write. cheers Richard (Incidentally, Tim is absolutely right: good, clear 'Notes to Editors' at the end of releases are the way to go.) -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Cloudmade%3A-%22We-are-the-Wikipedia-of-maps%22-tp22445658p22452008.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk -- -- Nick Black twitter.com/nick_b ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Cloudmade: We are the Wikipedia of maps
Lars Aronsson wrote: You have to explain how your rants help the project. The impression I get is that you cause division rather than unity. On a point of order, getting all meta on a flamewar like this is the most surefire way to prolong it. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Cloudmade%3A-%22We-are-the-Wikipedia-of-maps%22-tp22445658p22453905.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Cloudmade: We are the Wikipedia of maps
On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 11:57 AM, Lars Aronsson l...@aronsson.se wrote: You have to explain how your rants help the project. The impression I get is that you cause division rather than unity. Is that your goal? That seems destructive and irrational. If you want the public to understand the difference between OpenStreetMap and Cloudmade, this goal can not be achieved with your current rants. The main question is: Is your aim to air your personal feelings, or to help the project? pot, kettle, black, much? seriously guys, this whole conversation seems to have descended into ad-hominem attacks. continuing to criticise steve, frederik or anyone else isn't going to get us anywhere. cheers, matt ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Cloudmade: We are the Wikipedia of maps
On Wednesday 11 March 2009, Frederik Ramm wrote: It has been pointed out that Steve, apart from being a CM manager, is also the founder of the project and thus has to juggle various roles. Please then accept that besides running Geofabrik, I, too, am an active member of the OSM community and entitled to voice my opinion in this capacity. I think it is only normal for me to feel offended if an article makes it sound like the whole project was more or less the business success of some US company rather than the community effort it is and which I am a part of. I guess this is the main issue for Frederik here. SteveC being founder of OSM, chairman of OSMF and at the same time co-founder of CloudMade. It's not entirely far fetched to think SteveC may be trying to steer OSM(F) to what's best for his own company. Seeing a blog like that probably started off some warning bells in Frederik's head. While it's probably the interviewer's fault here to completely misrepresent the situation, it's only natural to be wary of persons in a position like SteveC's where conflicts of interest can happen. So don't be angry at Frederik here :-) Greetings Ben ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Cloudmade: We are the Wikipedia of maps
On 11 Mar 2009, at 12:26, Ben Laenen wrote: On Wednesday 11 March 2009, Frederik Ramm wrote: It has been pointed out that Steve, apart from being a CM manager, is also the founder of the project and thus has to juggle various roles. Please then accept that besides running Geofabrik, I, too, am an active member of the OSM community and entitled to voice my opinion in this capacity. I think it is only normal for me to feel offended if an article makes it sound like the whole project was more or less the business success of some US company rather than the community effort it is and which I am a part of. I guess this is the main issue for Frederik here. SteveC being founder of OSM, chairman of OSMF and at the same time co-founder of CloudMade. It's not entirely far fetched to think SteveC may be trying to steer OSM(F) to what's best for his own company. Seeing a blog like that probably started off some warning bells in Frederik's head. While it's probably the interviewer's fault here to completely misrepresent the situation, it's only natural to be wary of persons in a position like SteveC's where conflicts of interest can happen. So don't be angry at Frederik here :-) There have been reasons for concern, many of which have been raised in the past on this list and on legal-talk in the past and we don't need to raise them again. I really hope that we will all be able to learn from them and avoid the understandable wariness that is the result. SteveC is of course in a unique position in the project, both because of the fact that he got it going in the first place, but also because of the many roles he plays which means that he inevitably comes under greater scrutiny that other people. SteveC is also in the unique position of have a 'fake' version of himself, and FakeSteve seems to have started posting again after a period of absence following the last conference. The most recent 'hot babes' post is typical of the serious investigation and research that goes into FakeSteve's posts. http://fakestevec.blogspot.com/ CM's position having two directors on the OSMF board where no other commercial companies have any is also a reason for care. The important thing is that we are growing into a much stronger and mature community. We are building better governance structures, the role of the foundation is getting clearer and we are demanding more of the foundation and its directors which is good. There is now a foundation members email list which is a big step forward for the project. http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk This is probably a good time to remind people that they should be considering if they are up for the challenge of standing as directors in the coming year. If this year is anything to go by it will be a big year (again) and we will need a great set of directors! Frederik is of course playing a great role in pushing for higher levels of openness and professionalism from the foundation and others, and like-it-or-not, he is playing a vital role in moving us all forward. Long may he continue with this role and if he ever gets elected as a director then there will immediately be an opening for someone to fill his shoes ;) Regards, Peter Greetings Ben ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Cloudmade: We are the Wikipedia of maps
According to the style rules of the Italian press, interviewers have a certain margin to summarize in a striking short sentence the words of the person who is interviewed, and put that sentence in the headline between double quotes. So if Steve Coast is one day interviewed by an Italian journalist and that interview is read by non-Italians, I'm afraid Steve's life will be at risk. Regards, Lucas another fantastic 1. Someone makes a mistake 2. ??? 3. It's Steves fault Bet you were itching to make todays Guardian mistake my fault too, eh? I can tell you Frederik that I and the rest of us at CloudMade take great pains to explain the differences between CM and OSM but it doesn't always make it through. Instead of getting angry and writing a long rant, why don't you just mail the author and cc me or something in future, I'll happily back you up that they got it wrong. On 10 Mar 2009, at 16:14, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, as an OSM community member, I'm taking offence at the following article: http://techpulse360.com/2009/03/10/startup-cloudmade-wants-to-be-the-wikipedia-of-maps/ The article says that Cloudmade relies on its OpenStreetMap project, and: This is going to be the map of the future, says founder Steve Coast of his company. We're the Wikipedia of maps. This is of course wrong; OpenStreetMap is no Cloudmade's project, and Cloudmade is not the Wikipedia of maps. Further down, the article suggests that Cloudmade money was somehow related to mapping the world: But it's also a daunting task. The company raised $3.5 million from Sunstone Capital, but, well, the world is a large place. And: Coast says the goal is to give away the mapping data for free and charge for services. Of course, there is no mapping data that Cloudmade could give away for free because they don't own any. I know that the press always write what they want (or what they think they understand) and not necessarily what you tell them. Also, to their credit, the Cloudmade web page clearly and correctly states that We source our map data from OpenStreetMap, the community mapping project which is making a free map of the world. However, this is not the first time that the OpenStreetMap project has been confused with Cloudmade by the press, and I can hardly imagine that whoever wrote that article did so without relying on Cloudmade statements that somehow pointed in that direction. I would appreciate if Cloudmade PR people, especially in the US, would take more care in explaining the situation to the press, or if that is too much to ask, then at least refrain from misrepresenting the situation. If anyone is the Wikipedia of maps then it is the OpenStreetMap project which exists independently of Cloudmade. A very tiny portion of OpenStreetMap data is acquired during Cloudmade-sponsored events for which the project is grateful, but that does not give Cloudmade the right to act as if they own the project. I know that in the early days of the web, some access providers touted their dial-in plans as if the web was theirs - buy our package and get access to all these cool sites. Maybe it is hard for the public to understand, but an effort should be made to say that Cloudmade is an access provider, not a content provider. I'll try to make it a habit to point this out in the comment boxes of the relevant web pages if I see articles like that. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk Best Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Cloudmade: We are the Wikipedia of maps
Hi! Peter Miller schrieb: There have been reasons for concern, many of which have been raised in the past on this list and on legal-talk in the past and we don't need to raise them again. I really hope that we will all be able to learn from them and avoid the understandable wariness that is the result. I disagree with that for several reasons. - Time moves on, the project is growing at an impressive rate with new people coming in. To them, everything is new. - Things change and looking at something again after a while may bring a new view - If it keeps coming up, it might be important or it might not have been solved yet - When things come up as current news again, it is a good thing to examine them again. Therefore I think things should be raised again if there is something to add. If it really wasn't necessary, discussion will close shortly anyway. bye Nop ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Cloudmade: We are the Wikipedia of maps
Hi, as an OSM community member, I'm taking offence at the following article: http://techpulse360.com/2009/03/10/startup-cloudmade-wants-to-be-the-wikipedia-of-maps/ The article says that Cloudmade relies on its OpenStreetMap project, and: “This is going to be the map of the future,” says founder Steve Coast of his company. “We’re the Wikipedia of maps.” This is of course wrong; OpenStreetMap is no Cloudmade's project, and Cloudmade is not the Wikipedia of maps. Further down, the article suggests that Cloudmade money was somehow related to mapping the world: But it’s also a daunting task. The company raised $3.5 million from Sunstone Capital, but, well, the world is a large place. And: Coast says the goal is to give away the mapping data for free and charge for services. Of course, there is no mapping data that Cloudmade could give away for free because they don't own any. I know that the press always write what they want (or what they think they understand) and not necessarily what you tell them. Also, to their credit, the Cloudmade web page clearly and correctly states that We source our map data from OpenStreetMap, the community mapping project which is making a free map of the world. However, this is not the first time that the OpenStreetMap project has been confused with Cloudmade by the press, and I can hardly imagine that whoever wrote that article did so without relying on Cloudmade statements that somehow pointed in that direction. I would appreciate if Cloudmade PR people, especially in the US, would take more care in explaining the situation to the press, or if that is too much to ask, then at least refrain from misrepresenting the situation. If anyone is the Wikipedia of maps then it is the OpenStreetMap project which exists independently of Cloudmade. A very tiny portion of OpenStreetMap data is acquired during Cloudmade-sponsored events for which the project is grateful, but that does not give Cloudmade the right to act as if they own the project. I know that in the early days of the web, some access providers touted their dial-in plans as if the web was theirs - buy our package and get access to all these cool sites. Maybe it is hard for the public to understand, but an effort should be made to say that Cloudmade is an access provider, not a content provider. I'll try to make it a habit to point this out in the comment boxes of the relevant web pages if I see articles like that. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Cloudmade: We are the Wikipedia of maps
As a lurking OSM community member who has read many many tech articles that are factually wrong through no fault of the company and who has stood next to Steve Coast a number of times as he explained what CloudMade does, I feel the need to opine that this article is a reasonable balance of fact and analogy. Especially for a techblog that still uses the WordPress favicon. I grant that those of you in Europe may expect a higher level of professionalism and correctness from your technical journalists, but here in America we are happy with minimal wrongness and a relatively easy-to-understand story that will interest readers and cause them to investigate further. Adding a comment to the end of these articles (blog posts) is one way to address this issue. jessica forbess On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 4:14 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: Hi, as an OSM community member, I'm taking offence at the following article: http://techpulse360.com/2009/03/10/startup-cloudmade-wants-to-be-the-wikipedia-of-maps/ The article says that Cloudmade relies on its OpenStreetMap project, and: “This is going to be the map of the future,” says founder Steve Coast of his company. “We’re the Wikipedia of maps.” This is of course wrong; OpenStreetMap is no Cloudmade's project, and Cloudmade is not the Wikipedia of maps. Further down, the article suggests that Cloudmade money was somehow related to mapping the world: But it’s also a daunting task. The company raised $3.5 million from Sunstone Capital, but, well, the world is a large place. And: Coast says the goal is to give away the mapping data for free and charge for services. Of course, there is no mapping data that Cloudmade could give away for free because they don't own any. I know that the press always write what they want (or what they think they understand) and not necessarily what you tell them. Also, to their credit, the Cloudmade web page clearly and correctly states that We source our map data from OpenStreetMap, the community mapping project which is making a free map of the world. However, this is not the first time that the OpenStreetMap project has been confused with Cloudmade by the press, and I can hardly imagine that whoever wrote that article did so without relying on Cloudmade statements that somehow pointed in that direction. I would appreciate if Cloudmade PR people, especially in the US, would take more care in explaining the situation to the press, or if that is too much to ask, then at least refrain from misrepresenting the situation. If anyone is the Wikipedia of maps then it is the OpenStreetMap project which exists independently of Cloudmade. A very tiny portion of OpenStreetMap data is acquired during Cloudmade-sponsored events for which the project is grateful, but that does not give Cloudmade the right to act as if they own the project. I know that in the early days of the web, some access providers touted their dial-in plans as if the web was theirs - buy our package and get access to all these cool sites. Maybe it is hard for the public to understand, but an effort should be made to say that Cloudmade is an access provider, not a content provider. I'll try to make it a habit to point this out in the comment boxes of the relevant web pages if I see articles like that. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Cloudmade: We are the Wikipedia of maps
On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 11:14 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: I know that the press always write what they want (or what they think they understand) and not necessarily what you tell them. However, this is not the first time that the OpenStreetMap project has been confused with Cloudmade by the press, and I can hardly imagine that whoever wrote that article did so without relying on Cloudmade statements that somehow pointed in that direction. those who can -- do. those who can't -- blog. steve, as the founder of OSM and a founder of CloudMade, necessarily uses the word we in a subtle and nuanced way. it is unfortunate that this subtlety and meaning is often lost in the journalistic process. cheers, matt DISCLAIMER: the views expressed above are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of his employer ;-) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Cloudmade: We are the Wikipedia of maps
another fantastic 1. Someone makes a mistake 2. ??? 3. It's Steves fault Bet you were itching to make todays Guardian mistake my fault too, eh? I can tell you Frederik that I and the rest of us at CloudMade take great pains to explain the differences between CM and OSM but it doesn't always make it through. Instead of getting angry and writing a long rant, why don't you just mail the author and cc me or something in future, I'll happily back you up that they got it wrong. On 10 Mar 2009, at 16:14, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, as an OSM community member, I'm taking offence at the following article: http://techpulse360.com/2009/03/10/startup-cloudmade-wants-to-be-the-wikipedia-of-maps/ The article says that Cloudmade relies on its OpenStreetMap project, and: “This is going to be the map of the future,” says founder Steve Coast of his company. “We’re the Wikipedia of maps.” This is of course wrong; OpenStreetMap is no Cloudmade's project, and Cloudmade is not the Wikipedia of maps. Further down, the article suggests that Cloudmade money was somehow related to mapping the world: But it’s also a daunting task. The company raised $3.5 million from Sunstone Capital, but, well, the world is a large place. And: Coast says the goal is to give away the mapping data for free and charge for services. Of course, there is no mapping data that Cloudmade could give away for free because they don't own any. I know that the press always write what they want (or what they think they understand) and not necessarily what you tell them. Also, to their credit, the Cloudmade web page clearly and correctly states that We source our map data from OpenStreetMap, the community mapping project which is making a free map of the world. However, this is not the first time that the OpenStreetMap project has been confused with Cloudmade by the press, and I can hardly imagine that whoever wrote that article did so without relying on Cloudmade statements that somehow pointed in that direction. I would appreciate if Cloudmade PR people, especially in the US, would take more care in explaining the situation to the press, or if that is too much to ask, then at least refrain from misrepresenting the situation. If anyone is the Wikipedia of maps then it is the OpenStreetMap project which exists independently of Cloudmade. A very tiny portion of OpenStreetMap data is acquired during Cloudmade-sponsored events for which the project is grateful, but that does not give Cloudmade the right to act as if they own the project. I know that in the early days of the web, some access providers touted their dial-in plans as if the web was theirs - buy our package and get access to all these cool sites. Maybe it is hard for the public to understand, but an effort should be made to say that Cloudmade is an access provider, not a content provider. I'll try to make it a habit to point this out in the comment boxes of the relevant web pages if I see articles like that. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk Best Steve ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Cloudmade: We are the Wikipedia of maps
Frederik Ramm wrote: as an OSM community member, I'm taking offence at the following article: That article can indeed generate some unfortunate misinterpretations, but as you admit, it's hard to control what journalists write about you. Still, your first instinct is to attack Steve and Cloudmade. Unfortunately, this matches a pattern of your previous posts. What is the outcome you expect? That Steve should step down and leave you as heir of OpenStreetMap? That doesn't sound very likely. Do you have a goal, a strategy? Or is your frustration based on Geofabrik being a competitor to Cloudmade that has been far less successful in its marketing? If you asked the same journalist to interview you about Geofabrik, that would have a much better effect for the public understanding of OpenStreetMap's role than your current rants. It would immediately become clear that there is more than one company that can make money out of OpenStreetMap's data. How should Wikipedia explain to the public that uploaded photos may be reused commercially? The French Wikipedia has the answer: They made a contract with a printer, so you can order prints for a fee and have them mailed ot your home, http://wikiposter.fr/ A commercial offering says more than a thousand words. Coast says the goal is to give away the mapping data for free and charge for services. This indeed seems to be Steve's goal. He uses OpenStreetMap for the first part and Cloudmade for the second. If the journalist had only changed from Cloudmade to Steve's name in the second sentence, the article would have been much better: Steve Coast hopes to do the same (that Wikipedia has done) for maps. -- Lars Aronsson (l...@aronsson.se) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Cloudmade: We are the Wikipedia of maps
Lars, Lars Aronsson wrote: If you asked the same journalist to interview you about Geofabrik, that would have a much better effect for the public understanding of OpenStreetMap's role than your current rants. It has been pointed out that Steve, apart from being a CM manager, is also the founder of the project and thus has to juggle various roles. Please then accept that besides running Geofabrik, I, too, am an active member of the OSM community and entitled to voice my opinion in this capacity. I think it is only normal for me to feel offended if an article makes it sound like the whole project was more or less the business success of some US company rather than the community effort it is and which I am a part of. I'm prepared to accept that it was neither Steve's intention nor his wrongdoing that this article was published in the manner it was. But I can assure you that if, as a Geofabrik manager, I read an article that suggests that Geofabrik was the Wikipedia of maps, then I would either write a comment myself or ask someone else to write a comment to set the record straight - if only to avoid criticism like the one I started the thread with. And that takes us back to your question about my intention: My intention was that such mistakes are best avoided, and if they happen, are not shrugged off but corrected, at least as long as there is an easy way to do it. (If such a mis-representation happened in a written journal and I would have to request correction in writing, maybe I would not consider it worth the effort.) Coast says the goal is to give away the mapping data for free and charge for services. This indeed seems to be Steve's goal. He uses OpenStreetMap for the first part and Cloudmade for the second. If the journalist had only changed from Cloudmade to Steve's name in the second sentence, the article would have been much better: Steve Coast hopes to do the same (that Wikipedia has done) for maps. Well I don't know about Sweden but where I live the project has progressed far beyond the point where you would say that with OpenStreetMap, Steve Coast intends to whatever. You could have used such words three years ago. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
