Of course the OSM community does not depend on the OSMF to clearly
communicate to Facebook that their insulting behaviour is not
acceptable and that it will cost them a lot more economically in the
long term to continue acting this way than anything they might hope to
gain from it.
We are not talking about a simple company, we are actually talking about
a company that is a Gold Corporate Member of OSMF and have sponsored a
few events [1]. So if they are not aware of the license something is
clearly wrong in "showing their long term support to our organisation"
and "In doing so they are helping to keep OpenStreetMap's servers
running, supporting the work of our volunteer working groups, and above
all showing their support for OpenStreetMap" [2].
source:
[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Facebook_(company)
[2] https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Corporate_Members
And with at the moment at least four out of seven OSMF board members
having ties to big organizational OSM data users/contributors ... well,
as we say in German: Eine Krähe hackt der anderen kein Auge aus.
Are those ties public? Are they connected to any of the corporate
members of OSMF?
And quoting
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Historic/We_Are_Changing_The_License
But what happens if the Foundation is taken over by people with
commercial interests?
* You still own the rights to any data you contribute, not the
Foundation. In the new Contributor Terms, you license the
Foundation to publish the data for others to use and ONLY under a
free and open license.
* The Foundation is not allowed to take your contribution and
release it under a commercial license.
* If the Foundation fails to publish under only a free and open
license, it has broken its contract with you. A copy of the
existing data can be made and released by a different body.
* If a change is made to another free and open license, it is active
contributors who decide yes or no, not the Foundation.
Às 19:00 de 09/06/2019, Christoph Hormann escreveu:
On Sunday 09 June 2019, Nuno Caldeira wrote:
I hereby request OSMF board, responsabile for the OSMF, as the
Licensor under ODbL 9.4 c) to notify Facebook and remove their rights
under ODbL, if the violation is not fixed after 30 days of notice. as
written on ODbL.
https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/index.html
I applaud you placing the ball in the OSMF board's court on this matter
but i would not expect substantial actions from there.
Although Facebook is an extreme example it is by far not the only case
of big organizational OSM data users and contributors looking down on
the OSM community and its values and doing as they please disregarding
objections to what they do if they consider them unworthy or
insignificant.
And with at the moment at least four out of seven OSMF board members
having ties to big organizational OSM data users/contributors ... well,
as we say in German: Eine Krähe hackt der anderen kein Auge aus.
Of course the OSM community does not depend on the OSMF to clearly
communicate to Facebook that their insulting behaviour is not
acceptable and that it will cost them a lot more economically in the
long term to continue acting this way than anything they might hope to
gain from it.
But the question is of course if the OSM community as a whole is willing
to stand up to Facebook and others to defend our values. If you
imagine what percentage of OSM community members are Facebook customers
you might already have your answer. Or to put it slightly differently:
Why should Facebook even assume that OSM community members are in
anyway displeased with Facebook if they (to a large part) continue
using Facebook?
I mean using Facebook as a communication platform for the OSM community
is even advertised on osm.org (via iD editor and osm-community-index):
https://github.com/osmlab/osm-community-index/search?q=facebook&unscoped_q=facebook
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
