Quoting Ed Avis <e...@waniasset.com>:
<mike@...> writes:
2) good faith - are we making a reasonable effort to remove the IP of
folks who have not given us permission to continue? I certainly agree
with Ed that we should treat ex-contributors no differently to any IP
owner ... but feel we are already doing that in this and other
conversations.
Mike, in that case I would ask you to apply the 'Google Maps test'. If some
map data were entered by copying from a third party who did not give
permission,
but then edited in good faith, how much of the data needs to be unpicked?
In the past OSMF has taken a very cautious approach to this, which I believe
is the right one.
Ed,
Yes, that certainly seems reasonable to me though I would bow to the
more technically clued up, such as the Data Working Group. I would
speculate that it is an issue that has not come up, where there has
not been any significant subsequent edit activity the simplest and
most effective use of everyone's time is a simpler revert.
If after careful consideration you do formulate a policy ('the LWG
declares that
creating a node is not a creative operation, so it can be kept as
long as it has
been moved by somebody else afterwards', or whatever you decide),
then it should
also be applied to such third-party-copyright situations going forward.
Again, very reasonable to me going forward.
Originally it was promised that no big deletion would go ahead if it
would cause
too much damage to the OSM data. Is that still the case and if so
who is tasked
with deciding whether to pull the switch?
Community assent ... sounds vague to some may be, but has worked well
so far. Someone gave a good assessment in this or the Editing of
Content thread, sorry I cannot access it at the moment. By a number
of measures, we are in the range of 95% of data good to go, so I'd
personally say we are already at the no big deletion stage. We can
still increase that though, so we should. We've also said that we also
want to take local hotspots into consideration ... the UK, Germany and
Spain have a lot of red spots for example. The LWG's main task at the
moment is to get more undecided and non-responders on board and to
facilitate a small number of contributors who can say yes to some but
not all their contributions. Any chance of you changing your decline
now, that is the easiest way of decreasing deletions?
Mike
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
