Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 1:13 AM, Barnett, Phillip phillip.barn...@itn.co.uk wrote: The OSMF had an obligation, under the UK data protection laws, to preserve the confidentiality of personal information. It would have been a breach of confidence to make it public at the time. Not so. UK Data Protection laws exist to safeguard 'personal' data. Saying that ' there has been a large number of applications for OSMF membership by people who appear to be employees of Apple ' for instance, is perfectly in order - you are not releasing any 'personal data' UNLESS you also released, say, email addresses and names of the people, which can personally identify them, perhaps to back up your assertion. Saying 'a large number of applications from CloudMade' would have been effectively the same as naming the members. You'd only need to look here http://web.archive.org/web/20090524055747/http://cloudmade.com/team to have a pretty good idea of who was a member. The important point is that we didn't reveal this information. We saw an irregularity and investigated. We concluded that all the applications were bona-fide and they should be allowed as members. I've no idea whether they subsequently voted and I don't really care. What I do care about is that Jim Brown is making an assertion that this was done because CloudMade employees wanted passionately to join OSMF. This is what I'm calling him out on. Jim, do you still maintain that a large number of CloudMade employees and associates all spontaneously decided to join OSMF within one twenty-four hour period? 80n ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
[http://images.itn.co.uk/images/ITN_Master_blue.gif] PHILLIP BARNETT SERVER MANAGER 200 GRAY'S INN ROAD LONDON WC1X 8XZ UNITED KINGDOM T +44 (0)20 7430 4474 F E phillip.barn...@itn.co.uk WWW.ITN.CO.UK P Please consider the environment. Do you really need to print this email? From: 80n [80n...@gmail.com] Sent: 26 August 2011 07:25 To: Barnett, Phillip Cc: Jim Brown; talk@openstreetmap.org; Ed Avis Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 1:13 AM, Barnett, Phillip phillip.barn...@itn.co.ukmailto:phillip.barn...@itn.co.uk wrote: The OSMF had an obligation, under the UK data protection laws, to preserve the confidentiality of personal information. It would have been a breach of confidence to make it public at the time. Not so. UK Data Protection laws exist to safeguard 'personal' data. Saying that ' there has been a large number of applications for OSMF membership by people who appear to be employees of Apple ' for instance, is perfectly in order - you are not releasing any 'personal data' UNLESS you also released, say, email addresses and names of the people, which can personally identify them, perhaps to back up your assertion. Saying 'a large number of applications from CloudMade' would have been effectively the same as naming the members. You'd only need to look herehttp://web.archive.org/web/20090524055747/http://cloudmade.com/team to have a pretty good idea of who was a member. Well, this is a sideshow to the main debate, but you are still not revealing personal data, merely a fact about some or all members of a group. You are clear to do this under the UK Data Protection Act. I can say 'Most of the voting population of the UK live in this country and you can cross-refer to the UK electoral register, for names and addresses, but that doesn't mean I've released the personal details of 40 million people! In this instance, Cloudmade were releasing personal data. But since they're not under UK law, the fact that they released their own employees names and faces and email addresses is presumably between them, their employees, and the US government. HTH Phillip Please Note: Any views or opinions are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Independent Television News Limited unless specifically stated. This email and any files attached are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify postmas...@itn.co.uk Please note that to ensure regulatory compliance and for the protection of our clients and business, we may monitor and read messages sent to and from our systems. Thank You. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
Even if that might be legally correct it’s not morally correct, as we actually CAN trace that to persons. Hiding behind a formal legal description will save you from persecution only. Nevertheless naming Skobbler is doing harm to people. No-one should have mentioned the name Skobbler in the first place. I consider this a serious lack of respect and Henks’s first mail is proof of naming and shaming. Gert Van: Barnett, Phillip [mailto:phillip.barn...@itn.co.uk] Verzonden: Friday, August 26, 2011 11:23 AM Aan: 80n CC: talk@openstreetmap.org; Ed Avis Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees PHILLIP BARNETT SERVER MANAGER 200 GRAY'S INN ROAD LONDON WC1X 8XZ UNITED KINGDOM T +44 (0)20 7430 4474 F E phillip.barn...@itn.co.uk WWW.ITN.CO.UK P Please consider the environment. Do you really need to print this email? From: 80n [80n...@gmail.com] Sent: 26 August 2011 07:25 To: Barnett, Phillip Cc: Jim Brown; talk@openstreetmap.org; Ed Avis Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 1:13 AM, Barnett, Phillip phillip.barn...@itn.co.uk wrote: The OSMF had an obligation, under the UK data protection laws, to preserve the confidentiality of personal information. It would have been a breach of confidence to make it public at the time. Not so. UK Data Protection laws exist to safeguard 'personal' data. Saying that ' there has been a large number of applications for OSMF membership by people who appear to be employees of Apple ' for instance, is perfectly in order - you are not releasing any 'personal data' UNLESS you also released, say, email addresses and names of the people, which can personally identify them, perhaps to back up your assertion. Saying 'a large number of applications from CloudMade' would have been effectively the same as naming the members. You'd only need to look herehttp://web.archive.org/web/20090524055747/http://cloudmade.com/team http://web.archive.org/web/20090524055747/http:/cloudmade.com/team to have a pretty good idea of who was a member. Well, this is a sideshow to the main debate, but you are still not revealing personal data, merely a fact about some or all members of a group. You are clear to do this under the UK Data Protection Act. I can say 'Most of the voting population of the UK live in this country and you can cross-refer to the UK electoral register, for names and addresses, but that doesn't mean I've released the personal details of 40 million people! In this instance, Cloudmade were releasing personal data. But since they're not under UK law, the fact that they released their own employees names and faces and email addresses is presumably between them, their employees, and the US government. HTH Phillip Please Note: Any views or opinions are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Independent Television News Limited unless specifically stated. This email and any files attached are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify postmas...@itn.co.uk Please note that to ensure regulatory compliance and for the protection of our clients and business, we may monitor and read messages sent to and from our systems. Thank You. image001.jpg___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Barnett, Phillip phillip.barn...@itn.co.uk wrote: On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 1:13 AM, Barnett, Phillip phillip.barn...@itn.co.uk wrote: Well, this is a sideshow to the main debate, but you are still not revealing personal data, merely a fact about some or all members of a group. You are clear to do this under the UK Data Protection Act. I can say 'Most of the voting population of the UK live in this country and you can cross-refer to the UK electoral register, for names and addresses, but that doesn't mean I've released the personal details of 40 million people! In this instance, Cloudmade were releasing personal data. But since they're not under UK law, the fact that they released their own employees names and faces and email addresses is presumably between them, their employees, and the US government. The data point that we would have been revealing is that these people were members of OSMF. Membership of an organisation is personal information and we did not want to leak that information in any form whatsoever. Like you say, it's a sideshow. We didn't reveal the facts at the time and I believe that was the correct thing to do. There's nothing irregular about a co-ordinated signup from one company. We verified that the people joining were real individuals, not sockpuppets, and that was that. What I am surprised about is that Jim Brown continues to insist that these people signed up because they were passionate about OSM when the evidence suggests it was a co-ordinated act probably for the purpose of block voting. Jim, there is nothing wrong with doing such a thing, and I'm puzzled why you make some other excuse. 80n ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
On 26/08/11 10:47, 80n wrote: The data point that we would have been revealing is that these people were members of OSMF. Membership of an organisation is personal information and we did not want to leak that information in any form whatsoever. Of course the Companies Act actually requires the Foundation to provide a full list of members to anybody that asks anyway... Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
2011/8/26 80n 80n...@gmail.com: ... that these people signed up because they were passionate about OSM when the evidence suggests it was a co-ordinated act probably for the purpose of block voting. Jim, there is nothing wrong with doing such a thing IMHO there is something wrong with for the purpose of block voting.. Block voting suggests that they didn't (wouldn't have had) vote(d) based on individual judgement but rather on order. This is not desirable. Please note that I am not saying that cloudmade actually did perform this block vote, but I say that if they had done it, it would seem wrong to me. cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
[http://images.itn.co.uk/images/ITN_Master_blue.gif] PHILLIP BARNETT SERVER MANAGER 200 GRAY'S INN ROAD LONDON WC1X 8XZ UNITED KINGDOM T +44 (0)20 7430 4474 F E phillip.barn...@itn.co.uk WWW.ITN.CO.UK P Please consider the environment. Do you really need to print this email? From: 80n [80n...@gmail.com] Sent: 26 August 2011 10:47 To: Barnett, Phillip Cc: Jim Brown; talk@openstreetmap.org; Ed Avis Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Barnett, Phillip phillip.barn...@itn.co.ukmailto:phillip.barn...@itn.co.uk wrote: On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 1:13 AM, Barnett, Phillip phillip.barn...@itn.co.ukmailto:phillip.barn...@itn.co.uk wrote: Well, this is a sideshow to the main debate, but you are still not revealing personal data, merely a fact about some or all members of a group. You are clear to do this under the UK Data Protection Act. I can say 'Most of the voting population of the UK live in this country and you can cross-refer to the UK electoral register, for names and addresses, but that doesn't mean I've released the personal details of 40 million people! In this instance, Cloudmade were releasing personal data. But since they're not under UK law, the fact that they released their own employees names and faces and email addresses is presumably between them, their employees, and the US government. The data point that we would have been revealing is that these people were members of OSMF. Membership of an organisation is personal information and we did not want to leak that information in any form whatsoever. From the legislation guidance notes An individual is 'identified' if you have distinguished that individual from other members of a group. In most cases an individual's name together with some other information will be sufficient to identify them. http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/determining_what_is_personal_data/whatispersonaldata2.htm So if you had said that a large number of applications had been made from Apple employees, then since we have no way of knowing whether every single Apple employee, up to and including the janitor, had made an application to join, we are not be able to reverse-engineer the membership status of any individual employee, and so this is not 'personal' information but aggregate group information. And therefore the Data Protection Act doesn't come into it. Phillip Please Note: Any views or opinions are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Independent Television News Limited unless specifically stated. This email and any files attached are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify postmas...@itn.co.uk Please note that to ensure regulatory compliance and for the protection of our clients and business, we may monitor and read messages sent to and from our systems. Thank You. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
On 26/08/2011 11:33, Barnett, Phillip wrote: From the legislation guidance notes An individual is 'identified' if you have distinguished that individual from other members of a group. In most cases an individual's name together with some other information will be sufficient to identify them. http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/determining_what_is_personal_data/whatispersonaldata2.htm So if you had said that a large number of applications had been made from Apple employees, then since we have no way of knowing whether every single Apple employee, up to and including the janitor, had made an application to join, we are not be able to reverse-engineer the membership status of any individual employee, and so this is not 'personal' information but aggregate group information. And therefore the Data Protection Act doesn't come into it. Interestingly, when we converted an organisation recently to an official Charity under UK law, the Charity Commission wanted us to make it a requirement that the full membership list (names and home addresses) was available on demand to any member who requests it. That is the default position of their model constitution for charities. This seemed to us very odd indeed, quite contrary to Data Protection principles. The CC didn't actually insist on that as a requirement of our constitution, but we queried the point with them and they basically said the organisation is the membership and if you can't show to someone that the membership exists, then the organisation doesn't exist (I paraphrase). See Part 2, sec 8.4 http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/library/guidance/gd3text.pdf David ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
David, See http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/29/section/31 which specifically points to charities having exemption for various reasons - mostly to do with transparency of operation. Phillip PHILLIP BARNETT SERVER MANAGER 200 GRAY'S INN ROAD LONDON WC1X 8XZ UNITED KINGDOM T +44 (0)20 7430 4474 F E phillip.barn...@itn.co.uk WWW.ITN.CO.UK Please consider the environment. Do you really need to print this email? From: David Earl [da...@frankieandshadow.com] Sent: 26 August 2011 12:08 To: Barnett, Phillip Cc: 80n; talk@openstreetmap.org; Ed Avis Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees On 26/08/2011 11:33, Barnett, Phillip wrote: From the legislation guidance notes An individual is 'identified' if you have distinguished that individual from other members of a group. In most cases an individual's name together with some other information will be sufficient to identify them. http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/determining_what_is_personal_data/whatispersonaldata2.htm So if you had said that a large number of applications had been made from Apple employees, then since we have no way of knowing whether every single Apple employee, up to and including the janitor, had made an application to join, we are not be able to reverse-engineer the membership status of any individual employee, and so this is not 'personal' information but aggregate group information. And therefore the Data Protection Act doesn't come into it. Interestingly, when we converted an organisation recently to an official Charity under UK law, the Charity Commission wanted us to make it a requirement that the full membership list (names and home addresses) was available on demand to any member who requests it. That is the default position of their model constitution for charities. This seemed to us very odd indeed, quite contrary to Data Protection principles. The CC didn't actually insist on that as a requirement of our constitution, but we queried the point with them and they basically said the organisation is the membership and if you can't show to someone that the membership exists, then the organisation doesn't exist (I paraphrase). See Part 2, sec 8.4 http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/library/guidance/gd3text.pdf David Please Note: Any views or opinions are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Independent Television News Limited unless specifically stated. This email and any files attached are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify postmas...@itn.co.uk Please note that to ensure regulatory compliance and for the protection of our clients and business, we may monitor and read messages sent to and from our systems. Thank You. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 7:08 AM, David Earl da...@frankieandshadow.com wrote: Interestingly, when we converted an organisation recently to an official Charity under UK law, the Charity Commission wanted us to make it a requirement that the full membership list (names and home addresses) was available on demand to any member who requests it. That is the default position of their model constitution for charities. This seemed to us very odd indeed, quite contrary to Data Protection principles. Seems to me most of you are misinterpreting the Data Protection Act. Where do you get the idea that it would stop you from revealing the membership of a charity? The laws of most jurisdictions provide the exact opposite - that the names and addresses of non-profit organization members is public knowledge. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Barnett, Phillip phillip.barn...@itn.co.uk wrote: From the legislation guidance notes An individual is 'identified' if you have distinguished that individual from other members of a group. In most cases an individual's name together with some other information will be sufficient to identify them. http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/determining_what_is_personal_data/whatispersonaldata2.htm So if you had said that a large number of applications had been made from Apple employees, then since we have no way of knowing whether every single Apple employee, up to and including the janitor, had made an application to join, we are not be able to reverse-engineer the membership status of any individual employee, and so this is not 'personal' information but aggregate group information. Regardless of whether the data protection act was relevant, we acted on the side of caution. CloudMade is not Apple. If we had disclosed that a large number of CloudMade employees had just signed up then because it was such a small company it would have been pretty easy to deduce who might or might not be a member. In any case since there was no wrong doing there was nothing to disclose anyway. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 10:56 AM, Tom Hughes t...@compton.nu wrote: On 26/08/11 10:47, 80n wrote: The data point that we would have been revealing is that these people were members of OSMF. Membership of an organisation is personal information and we did not want to leak that information in any form whatsoever. Of course the Companies Act actually requires the Foundation to provide a full list of members to anybody that asks anyway... Indeed. And if somebody [1] had asked then there is an obligation to provide that person with the list of members. But that's not the same as broadcasting the information in public to everyone. You, as a member of OSMF, can request a list of members but that probably wouldn't disclose email addresses and you might not be able to infer if anyone on the list was a Skobbler employee. Announcing that a large number of Skobbler employees is exceeding the obligations that the board has. That announcement should not have been made. 80n [1] As I recall only members can request a membership list and they have to provide a reasonable justification for their list. Failure to supply the list can be challenged in the courts. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 8:32 AM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote: Regardless of whether the data protection act was relevant, we acted on the side of caution. I wouldn't characterize withholding relevant public information from the public as acting on the side of caution. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
On 26/08/11 13:48, 80n wrote: [1] As I recall only members can request a membership list and they have to provide a reasonable justification for their list. Failure to supply the list can be challenged in the courts. Nope. The only difference is that you can't charge members for it but you can charge non-members. Details here: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/116 Actually strictly speaking you can charge anybody that wants a copy but you have to allow members to inspect it for free. Requests can only be rejected if the company applies to the court for permission to do so: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/117 Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
Hasn't it happened in the past that large numbers of Cloudmade employees have joined the OSMF? That didn't cause the organization to be somehow subverted, and neither will people who work for Skobbler (or Microsoft, or whoever). -- Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
On 25 August 2011 19:15, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote: Hasn't it happened in the past that large numbers of Cloudmade employees have joined the OSMF? That didn't cause the organization to be somehow subverted, and neither will people who work for Skobbler (or Microsoft, or whoever). In the past OSM-F was merely supporting OSM contributors, now that they've decided to own the database things are some what different, and OSM-F has set itself up as a target. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
On 25/08/11 10:15, Ed Avis wrote: Hasn't it happened in the past that large numbers of Cloudmade employees have joined the OSMF? That didn't cause the organization to be somehow subverted, and neither will people who work for Skobbler (or Microsoft, or whoever). This is, by my understanding, the third year it has happened. Two years ago it was, as you say, a large number of Cloudmade employees, and I assume that it what Steve was alluding to. Last year it was a large number of Skobbler employees. This year it appears to be an additional group of Skobbler employees. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 5:15 AM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote: Hasn't it happened in the past that large numbers of Cloudmade employees have joined the OSMF? That didn't cause the organization to be somehow subverted I wouldn't be so sure about that. The organization has gone downhill ever since. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
2011/8/25 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org: Call me a cynic, but from my (limited) experience with other not-for-profits and I tend to thinkg that the amount of fear, hate, mistrust, and general bad karma is proportional to the size and budget of the organisation. can't disagree with this suspicion. If we manage to keep OSMF small and relatively unimportant, then we'll avoid problems like those. This was completely easy in the past, but is it realistic to keep OSMF relatively unimportant if it is rights holder for all the data? cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com writes: This was completely easy in the past, but is it realistic to keep OSMF relatively unimportant if it is rights holder for all the data? It might be better to spin off a separate organization which is the rights holder, separate from the less contentious OSMF functions like providing funding to keep the servers running or organizing SoTM. -- Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
On 25 August 2011 22:26, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote: Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com writes: This was completely easy in the past, but is it realistic to keep OSMF relatively unimportant if it is rights holder for all the data? It might be better to spin off a separate organization which is the rights holder, separate from the less contentious OSMF functions like providing funding to keep the servers running or organizing SoTM. Wouldn't spreading resources thinner only make it easier for someone with enough money and other resources to game the system? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
I almost hesitate to jump in, but I'd like to give the perspective from Cloudmade that I think is probably mirrored in skobbler. In Cloudmade staff are passionate about OSM and mapping. Many of the staff wanted to join OSMF 2 years ago and we encouraged that. And we got the same reaction from some parts of the community. However, I can clearly state that my team (and most of them were my team) would have told me to f#%k off if I even tried to tell them how to map, hack or vote. The employees of Cloudmade are as diverse a set of mappers as any other group of OSM members and it was down right rude at that time to view them as corporate surrogates being directed to some sinister goal. They may share some common concerns but so do lots of other collections of people in OSM. In short I think the same thing is happening to the individuals at skobbler who are probably wondering now (like my guys did in the past) why the hell did I bother getting involved? My $0.02 only. Jim Brown CTO - CloudMade j...@cloudmade.com Sent from my iPad On 25 Aug 2011, at 05:34, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 25 August 2011 22:26, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote: Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com writes: This was completely easy in the past, but is it realistic to keep OSMF relatively unimportant if it is rights holder for all the data? It might be better to spin off a separate organization which is the rights holder, separate from the less contentious OSMF functions like providing funding to keep the servers running or organizing SoTM. Wouldn't spreading resources thinner only make it easier for someone with enough money and other resources to game the system? ___ 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] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Jim Brown j...@cloudmade.com wrote: I almost hesitate to jump in, but I'd like to give the perspective from Cloudmade that I think is probably mirrored in skobbler. In Cloudmade staff are passionate about OSM and mapping. Many of the staff wanted to join OSMF 2 years ago and we encouraged that. And we got the same reaction from some parts of the community. Jim My recollection was that they all got passionate about OSM on the same day, just one day before the close of email voting for that year's election. Care to comment on that? 80n However, I can clearly state that my team (and most of them were my team) would have told me to f#%k off if I even tried to tell them how to map, hack or vote. The employees of Cloudmade are as diverse a set of mappers as any other group of OSM members and it was down right rude at that time to view them as corporate surrogates being directed to some sinister goal. They may share some common concerns but so do lots of other collections of people in OSM. In short I think the same thing is happening to the individuals at skobbler who are probably wondering now (like my guys did in the past) why the hell did I bother getting involved? My $0.02 only. Jim Brown CTO - CloudMade j...@cloudmade.com Sent from my iPad On 25 Aug 2011, at 05:34, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 25 August 2011 22:26, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote: Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com writes: This was completely easy in the past, but is it realistic to keep OSMF relatively unimportant if it is rights holder for all the data? It might be better to spin off a separate organization which is the rights holder, separate from the less contentious OSMF functions like providing funding to keep the servers running or organizing SoTM. Wouldn't spreading resources thinner only make it easier for someone with enough money and other resources to game the system? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ 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] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
Sure... They were passionate prior to that of course. Look at the evolution of the kyiv map over time. It's also really telling that so many have left Cloudmade and still are part of the community, these are individual mappers your are talking about. People who give a damn about OSM, They just started talking and asking about getting into OSMF, which they needed help doing as you probably recall I think. It used to be much harder to join. So we decided to help, and so they joined. I'm doubly surprised that you still think that was some evil plan. Nothing particularly evil came from it as I recall. But if you do still think there was bad intent, it is obviously pointless to try and change your mind. I'm just glad most of the community seems to be over it. Ciao, Jim On 25 Aug 2011, at 08:17, 80n 80n...@gmail.commailto:80n...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Jim Brown mailto:j...@cloudmade.comj...@cloudmade.commailto:j...@cloudmade.com wrote: I almost hesitate to jump in, but I'd like to give the perspective from Cloudmade that I think is probably mirrored in skobbler. In Cloudmade staff are passionate about OSM and mapping. Many of the staff wanted to join OSMF 2 years ago and we encouraged that. And we got the same reaction from some parts of the community. Jim My recollection was that they all got passionate about OSM on the same day, just one day before the close of email voting for that year's election. Care to comment on that? 80n However, I can clearly state that my team (and most of them were my team) would have told me to f#%k off if I even tried to tell them how to map, hack or vote. The employees of Cloudmade are as diverse a set of mappers as any other group of OSM members and it was down right rude at that time to view them as corporate surrogates being directed to some sinister goal. They may share some common concerns but so do lots of other collections of people in OSM. In short I think the same thing is happening to the individuals at skobbler who are probably wondering now (like my guys did in the past) why the hell did I bother getting involved? My $0.02 only. Jim Brown CTO - CloudMade mailto:j...@cloudmade.comj...@cloudmade.commailto:j...@cloudmade.com Sent from my iPad On 25 Aug 2011, at 05:34, John Smith mailto:deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comdeltafoxtrot...@gmail.commailto:deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 25 August 2011 22:26, Ed Avis mailto:e...@waniasset.come...@waniasset.commailto:e...@waniasset.com wrote: Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at http://gmail.com gmail.comhttp://gmail.com writes: This was completely easy in the past, but is it realistic to keep OSMF relatively unimportant if it is rights holder for all the data? It might be better to spin off a separate organization which is the rights holder, separate from the less contentious OSMF functions like providing funding to keep the servers running or organizing SoTM. Wouldn't spreading resources thinner only make it easier for someone with enough money and other resources to game the system? ___ talk mailing list mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org talk@openstreetmap.orgmailto:talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list mailto:talk@openstreetmap.orgtalk@openstreetmap.orgmailto:talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talkhttp://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 7:40 PM, Jim Brown j...@cloudmade.com wrote: Sure... They were passionate prior to that of course. Look at the evolution of the kyiv map over time. It's also really telling that so many have left Cloudmade and still are part of the community, these are individual mappers your are talking about. People who give a damn about OSM, They just started talking and asking about getting into OSMF, which they needed help doing as you probably recall I think. It used to be much harder to join. So we decided to help, and so they joined. The thing you need to explain is the timing. Why was there a mass signup just before the end of the voting period? Why did you decide to help them at that moment? I'm doubly surprised that you still think that was some evil plan. Nothing particularly evil came from it as I recall. Who is making an accusation that it was an evil plan? What I said was My recollection was that they all got passionate about OSM on the same day, just one day before the close of email voting for that year's election. Why do you feel the need to be defensive? But if you do still think there was bad intent, it is obviously pointless to try and change your mind. I'm just glad most of the community seems to be over it. It was never publicly disclosed to the community. The OSMF had an obligation, under the UK data protection laws, to preserve the confidentiality of personal information. It would have been a breach of confidence to make it public at the time. I can only ask you about it now because you raised the subject here yourself just now. As Gert [1] mentioned, it was inappropriate for Henk to have publicly announced that Skobbler were apparently doing the same thing this year. So, could you please explain the timing of this co-ordinated signup by CloudMade employees and associates? 80n [1] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2011-August/001145.html ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
[http://images.itn.co.uk/images/ITN_Master_blue.gif] PHILLIP BARNETT SERVER MANAGER 200 GRAY'S INN ROAD LONDON WC1X 8XZ UNITED KINGDOM T +44 (0)20 7430 4474 F E phillip.barn...@itn.co.uk WWW.ITN.CO.UK P Please consider the environment. Do you really need to print this email? From: 80n [80n...@gmail.com] Sent: 25 August 2011 20:34 To: Jim Brown Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org; Ed Avis Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees The OSMF had an obligation, under the UK data protection laws, to preserve the confidentiality of personal information. It would have been a breach of confidence to make it public at the time. Not so. UK Data Protection laws exist to safeguard 'personal' data. Saying that ' there has been a large number of applications for OSMF membership by people who appear to be employees of Apple ' for instance, is perfectly in order - you are not releasing any 'personal data' UNLESS you also released, say, email addresses and names of the people, which can personally identify them, perhaps to back up your assertion. Phillip Obligatory disclaimers : IANAL, but I have read the Data Protection Act. (Which is commonly misused by people who haven't read it) All my opinions are my own, and are not necessarily shared by my employers. Please Note: Any views or opinions are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Independent Television News Limited unless specifically stated. This email and any files attached are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify postmas...@itn.co.uk Please note that to ensure regulatory compliance and for the protection of our clients and business, we may monitor and read messages sent to and from our systems. Thank You. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
Jim Brown writes: Sure... They were passionate prior to that of course. Look at the evolution of the kyiv map over time. It's also really telling that so many have left Cloudmade and still are part of the community, these are individual mappers your are talking about. People who give a damn about OSM, I was a mapper before, during, and after my Cloudmade days. They just started talking and asking about getting into OSMF, which they needed help doing as you probably recall I think. It used to be much harder to join. So we decided to help, and so they joined. You need to stir your whitewash, Jim. It's a little thin. I can't speak for anybody in England or Kyiv, but the community ambassadors were instructed to join the OSMF, and the cost was expensable. It was a great idea, but it came down from corporate, not up from the ranks. I'm doubly surprised that you still think that was some evil plan. Nothing particularly evil came from it as I recall. Agreed, nothing evil came of it. -- --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] [osmf-talk] Membership applications from Skobbler employees
[apologies for posting to talk rather than osmf-talk - very bizarrely, I appear to have been *un*subscribed from osmf-talk upon renewing my membership. Go figure. :) For those not following, the issue is the application of a large number of Skobbler employees to join OSMF, shortly before the OSMF elections. It has been suggested this would mean that ~65 of the total OSMF membership were Skobbler employees. Full thread at http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2011-August/date.html] Serge Wroclawski wrote: I can't speak to the specifics of this situation; I don't know the individuals, or the company involved, but I will say that on the surface, it would seem that this company has chosen a path which has ruffled some feathers, and I'd hope that this thread acts as a message to it and other companies to be sensitive in how they interact with the foundation, and the community, and to be concious of how their actions, whatever the intent, may appear. +1. In my experience (outside OSM) there are three reasons for anyone to join a membership organisation such as OSMF: a) to gain a vote in the affairs of the organisation; b) to financially support the aims of the organisation; c) to receive member-only benefits. In the particular case of OSMF, a company can achieve (b) by making a donation (via http://donate.openstreetmap.org/ or direct to the foundation), and indeed this is more effective as it doesn't incur the overheads of membership. It's a well-established route: Google famously, and generously, gave £5,000 in a recent donations drive. That leaves (a) or (c). For (c), the only OSMF member-only benefit, as I understand it, is reduced admission to the State of the Map. It's very possible that Skobbler has signed its employees up to OSMF because it's planning to fly them all over to Denver and this works out cheaper. (Personally I would have thought that sponsoring SotM, as Mapquest, Bing, ESRI, Waze et al are doing, would have been more cost-effective as presumably sponsors receive a discount on admission, but I don't know this for sure.) Or (a), to gain a vote in the affairs of the organisation. Serge makes a distinction between impropriety and the appearance of impropriety, and Steve has alluded to the reaction when many Cloudmade employees joined - I think you have to look at this in the context of the last time a company paid for its employees to become members. There is no evidence of any impropriety; the risk is an appearance of impropriety. The question how will this play on Slashdot? is not a bad one to ask. Oliver Kuhn, Chief Commercial Officer of Skobbler, is of course already on the OSMF board and has posted that he personally believes OSM should concentrate on the needs of data consumers like his (http://www.abalakov.com/openstreetmap-map-data-who-cares), steering contributors towards projects such as addressing (http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2010-July/051511.html), and that it could consider weakening the share-alike clause (http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2010-June/003398.html). Again, there's no suggestion that Oliver has been using his OSMF position to push these aims, and I'm sure he wouldn't. The risk is the appearance of impropriety in a situation summed up as the Skobbler CCO is on the OSMF board; the Skobbler CCO wants OSM to concentrate on the sort of data used by his company; Skobbler has paid for its employees to join OSMF such that they now form a large bloc. To avoid this appearance of impropriety, I think it would have been better for Skobbler to instead either make a donation to OSMF or sponsor SotM. But, again, there's nothing in the Articles preventing them from signing up 65 members; if they want to, they're perfectly entitled to. For the avoidance of doubt, I believe commercial support for OSM is a good thing and am not arguing against it. cheers Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
