On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Emilie Laffray <emilie.laff...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > First of all, let me just say it is indeed impolite to share private > conversation but I would love to see that tested in a court. > That said, the whole point of people in FOSM waiting for OSM to fail is kind > of annoying.
I think someone has given you the wrong impression about FOSM. It's a free-standing fork of OSM that differs only in that it continues to use CC-BY-SA. We consider this to be a better license for contributors and we feel that contributors are the most valuable part of the equation. Sadly, OSM does not appear to value or care for contributors interests as much as I once hoped it would. Nobody expects OSM to fail. I was the first to point out to Steve Coast, in 2006, that OSM was already an unstoppable train. Not even the stress caused by the license change could prevent it's success. > I understand why the fork happened (doesn't mean that I agree > with it); I understand why some people are reacting the way they do but I > have to admit it is getting ridiculous. > FOSM is a fork. In many ways OSM is the fork. It is the project that is unsatisified with the status-quo. Although it has not yet managed to publish anything under ODbL and I wouldn't bet money on it achieving that objective any time soon. >It is a conscious statement that you wanted to break away. I > am glad that you guys had that *freedom* in the first place (despite all the > FUD that the new contributor terms won't allow forking) and I wish you the > best of luck in this project as I wish the best of luck to other mapping > projects like Common map for example. Now, you decided to leave the project > so just leave it. We all have the same goals. Free and open mapping data. Your language suggests you are trying to push people away. While there is indeed a license fork, there has never been a need for a fork of the community. You will recognise many fosm contributors as being major characters in the OSM community. >I am not going to go to FOSM and ask for my data to be > deleted playing on my moral right for example (even though sometimes I am > seriously tempted to ask for my data to be removed out of exasperation due > to the behaviour of some members of FOSM). Please explain more about the behaviour of fosm members? We don't have members as such, but I get what you mean. As far as I can see fosm contributors are a very happy and contented bunch. Especially when compared to some of the rhetoric on this list. > If you strongly believe that ODbL won't stand the legal scrutiny, mount a > legal challenge to it. Just do it. That said, you have to realize that ODbL > is currently the licence that is being used more and more in France for > OpenData and actually across the world having being reviewed by several > legal departments. You may not agree with the way it was drafted but it > seriously look like it has some legs. > If you point out elements that have been copied, we will be happy to make > sure that people is not copying from your data. Anyway up to a point, the > data will be replaced and the very use of copyright on fact is tenuous at > best. I think from that point of view, despite all the mistakes the > foundation made during the process (we are after all volunteers), the > foundation has shown lot of willingness to sort many issues; it just that at > some points we can only agree to disagree hence why there was a fork. > You are just trolling. >You are not even constructive towards FOSM. From the > way I look at it, FOSM is only a half hearted fork where there are only a > few people actually contributing, the rest of them is just sulking that OSM > didn't go their way. There's nothing half-hearted about fosm. Many of the people involved in it have been working with OSM since the very early days and are unlikely to go away. Some of OSMs most prolific contributors now contribute exclusively to fosm. > Maybe it is time to be more constructive towards the > choice that you made. From that point of view, I really appreciate the work > of some people in FOSM who are actually being constructive. > > In short, feel free to complain when your data is *REALLY* used wrongly. > Else, put up or shut up regarding the ODbL. If you really believe that it is > not going to work, mount a proper legal challenge. No doubt, if the license change and redaction is not handled properly then it will end up in the courts. We will all lose if that happens. The laywers will be the only ones that win from that outcome. > > Emilie Laffray > > > On 29 May 2012 10:53, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen > <g.grem...@cetest.nl> wrote: >> >> I did not give you permission to share >> a private conversation on the list. >> >> That is also about copyrights, Davie. >> > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
