Chris,
I have to say I am confused about your reasoning. In this long list you don't
give a single reason why you think that ODbL is worse than CC by SA.
All your objections are about the process of change. One of your main
objections is that there was too much communication and discussion about the
reasons for the change, which seems a very strange concern to me.
You say there was not enough due diligence but the process has been going on
well over a year with a massive amount of review and discussion.
You talk about changing the "fundamental nature of the organization" but I have
no idea what you mean by this. ODbL embodies exactly the same principles as CC
by SA was intended to, but is much more enforceable. As I said previously, the
nature of the organization is all about creating a great free and open map of
the world, that certainly has not changed either.
So again, I'm sorry that you feel this way but I have to say I really don't
understand your reasoning.
Cheers,
Peter.
Sent from my iPad
On May 11, 2010, at 7:21 PM, Chris Hunter <chunter...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm basing my decision on the ODbL roadmap
> (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Implementation_Plan),
> Why you should vote Yes
> (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Why_You_Should_Vote_No)
> and Why you should vote No
> (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Why_You_Should_Vote_No)
> pages in the WIKI.
>
> Here are my objections:
>
> The OSMF did not do enough due-diligance before voting to adopt the ODBL.
> Discussion was done on an extremely noisy list (talk@) and AFAIK none of the
> board ever cross-posted progress reports to the sub-lists. This is a classic
> case of security-by-obscurity. - See Chapter 1 of the Hitchhiker's Guide to
> the Galaxy.
>
> The change is being done on the say-so of only 132 out of 254 paid members.
> I'm not an expert on Robert's Rules, but don't you need to have to have a
> super-majority to change the fundamental nature of an organization?
>
> The roadmap as it stood yesterday made it sound like the ODbL is already
> passed, and that the OSMF was just dragging its heals about when it plans on
> implementing it or notifying anyone. If this is not correct, I apologize.
>
> Last weekend I did some fairly minor WIKI updates and noticed several
> slippymaps were rendering with a reference to something called the
> "Openstreetmap License." Between the updated slippymaps and Firefishy's
> original edit, it sounded like the OSMF had finally gotten around to making
> the contributor license mandatory.
>
> 4.a My current job is time consuming and has a draconian Internet access
> policy. I may well have become a victim of FUD, but I can only read my email
> on my phone, and I simply don't have time to read the talk@ group's 5+ daily
> digests. See points 1 and 3.
>
> The OSMF's actions have made me feel disenfranchised on several occasions.
> My biggest sources of frustration are the original Local Chapter agreement,
> and the ODBL adoption vote that was taken on 27-Dec-2009
> (http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2009-December/000753.html).
>
> To answer Serge's PMs, yes, this is a low blow, but my experiences on points
> 3 and 4 made me feel like there was no other choice. If I can stretch your
> metaphor a bit, it was looking like the jack-boots were on the doorstep, so a
> kick to the groin seemed like the best defense.
> What did you find objectionable? Maybe I'll be turned off by it too.
>
> I'm not speaking for Chris, but I'm of the opinion that the OSM Foundation
> did not perform due diligence in getting the approval (or at least the
> opinion) of the overall contributors to the database. I think I understand
> that the OSMF's opinion is that the license change is needed in order to have
> a legal framework to operate internationally, but I don't think it's
> appropriate to only ask the ~300 members of OSMF for approval.
>
> Please take this with a grain of salt though, as I think the current change
> only applies to new user accounts.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
