Re: [OSM-talk] Users whose contributions are in the public domain
On Sun, May 4, 2008 at 2:21 PM, Ari Torhamo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: su, 2008-05-04 kello 15:40 +0200, Mike Collinson kirjoitti: At 01:33 PM 4/05/2008, Ari Torhamo wrote: la, 2008-05-03 kello 17:39 -0400, Ted Mielczarek kirjoitti: Why else are we contributing this data if not for people to *use* it? I suggest you go and present this breath taking argument to RMS, and we might soon get an updated, more free version of GPL. Ari The GPL works very well as it already allows folks to *use* software with no restriction on what they make with that use. Adding something new to GPL software source code is clearly different from using existing GPL software to do something new. That distinction is far from clear when using collations of facts like OSM data. So a different model is required. The PD argument is a very easy and elegant solution, but it makes some contributors very uncomfortable. The new license being worked on seeks to make a, hopefully, comprehensible distinction for factual data. OK, thanks for explaining this. I was actually just responding to sarcasm that I didn't like, but perhaps I could have been more educated doing it :-) (or perhaps it would be best that we weren't sarcastic to each other at all). For what it's worth, I wasn't being sarcastic, more like exasperated. I hate seeing licensing issues confound useful activities, whether they be software, music, art, or mapping. Seeing people wasting time having a discussion about whether they can legally use something instead of spending that time doing something useful makes me sad. I apologize if I came off as sarcastic, it can be difficult to infer tone over email! Regards, -Ted ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Users whose contributions are in the public domain
On May 6, 2008, at 9:44 AM, Nathan Vander Wilt wrote: [blah, blah, blah] I hope that I did make my concerns clear without offending anyone too greatly. Regardless, it would probably be more helpful to say what I hope could be done to address my concerns, instead of just more-or- less complaining. I really would like to see a license as simple as the following: For data users - 0. Open Street Map collects and creates public domain map data. 1. Attribution of Open Street Map is expected. We make it easy. 2. Contributing back or freely sharing modifications is strongly encouraged. For map editors - 1. Only add essentially uncopyrighted map data. 2. You are welcome join the list of contributors. This is pretty much how the Public Domain Data Licence with Community Norms works, right? (See http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Open_Data_License#Criticism ) Set up community norms to say BY-SA and it seems like a perfect fit for the data and (hopefully) most contributors' wishes. I see a lot of benefits to this, certainly over the current license, but even over the proposed set of new licenses: - Easy for contributors large and small to understand. - Much easier to check existing datasets for compatibility. - Doesn't change much for data users in the open source community. - Enables commercial use by small companies who want to do the right thing, but can't just ignore grey areas that leave them or their customers liable. - It wouldn't change much as far as abuse by large corporations, as I'm sure their lawyers are earning more than our lawyers anyway. It actually seems like a clearer license with more indemnity could encourage a bigger company that is still somewhat concerned with it's PR credibility to use the data as intended. Wouldn't the resulting publicity do much more for OSM than a viral license? Right now the current and proposed licenses only seems to hurt small businesses, who can afford neither proprietary data nor the liabilities of the remaining grey areas. (I hope that precluding any sort of commercial use of the data is not the intent of most contributors.) If the data is in the public domain, sure some bad guys might abuse it, but please don't disregard the benefit that companies willing to follow the spirit of the community norms could bring to the project. thanks, -natevw ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Users whose contributions are in the public domain
Ari Torhamo wrote: OK, thanks for explaining this. I was actually just responding to sarcasm that I didn't like, but perhaps I could have been more educated doing it :-) (or perhaps it would be best that we weren't sarcastic to each other at all). Sarcasm can be a major problem on lists where a lot of the users do not have English as a first language! It often produces unnecessary discussions EXPLAINING the 'nuances' so many internationally spread lists do tend to clamp down on it ;) -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://home.lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://home.lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Users whose contributions are in the public domain
Hi, I don't understand why some users want their work in PD. You don't have to understand, just accept that some want it. Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Users whose contributions are in the public domain
lol... He doesn't need to understand, but he would like to understand... which is an admirable thing...;-) Lucas De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] en nombre de Frederik Ramm Enviado el: lun 05/05/2008 1:00 Para: Vincent MEURISSE CC: talk@openstreetmap.org Asunto: Re: [OSM-talk] Users whose contributions are in the public domain Hi, I don't understand why some users want their work in PD. You don't have to understand, just accept that some want it. Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Users whose contributions are in the public domain
la, 2008-05-03 kello 17:39 -0400, Ted Mielczarek kirjoitti: For me, it seems ironic that a project spawned from licensing issues over map data has found itself in a situation where licensing issues are still a problem, Yeah, what an irony. Those who started the project must have thought that there would never be any licencing issues... [...] Why else are we contributing this data if not for people to *use* it? I suggest you go and present this breath taking argument to RMS, and we might soon get an updated, more free version of GPL. Ari ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Users whose contributions are in the public domain
At 01:33 PM 4/05/2008, Ari Torhamo wrote: la, 2008-05-03 kello 17:39 -0400, Ted Mielczarek kirjoitti: Why else are we contributing this data if not for people to *use* it? I suggest you go and present this breath taking argument to RMS, and we might soon get an updated, more free version of GPL. Ari The GPL works very well as it already allows folks to *use* software with no restriction on what they make with that use. Adding something new to GPL software source code is clearly different from using existing GPL software to do something new. That distinction is far from clear when using collations of facts like OSM data. So a different model is required. The PD argument is a very easy and elegant solution, but it makes some contributors very uncomfortable. The new license being worked on seeks to make a, hopefully, comprehensible distinction for factual data. Mike ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Users whose contributions are in the public domain
su, 2008-05-04 kello 15:40 +0200, Mike Collinson kirjoitti: At 01:33 PM 4/05/2008, Ari Torhamo wrote: la, 2008-05-03 kello 17:39 -0400, Ted Mielczarek kirjoitti: Why else are we contributing this data if not for people to *use* it? I suggest you go and present this breath taking argument to RMS, and we might soon get an updated, more free version of GPL. Ari The GPL works very well as it already allows folks to *use* software with no restriction on what they make with that use. Adding something new to GPL software source code is clearly different from using existing GPL software to do something new. That distinction is far from clear when using collations of facts like OSM data. So a different model is required. The PD argument is a very easy and elegant solution, but it makes some contributors very uncomfortable. The new license being worked on seeks to make a, hopefully, comprehensible distinction for factual data. OK, thanks for explaining this. I was actually just responding to sarcasm that I didn't like, but perhaps I could have been more educated doing it :-) (or perhaps it would be best that we weren't sarcastic to each other at all). Ari ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Users whose contributions are in the public domain
I don't understand why some users want their work in PD. The goal of osm is to have a map of the world freely available for anyone. But with PD someone (eg google) can take all the work of osm, correct and complete it, and copyright it in a way that osm cannot reuse the modification. So the copyrighted map will be better than the free one. The license cc by-sa is a good protection against that as it will always allow osm to use derivate work of the original map. On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 4:36 AM, Bruce Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 2008-05-02 at 17:01 +0100, Andy Allan wrote: And where all the data entered by the PD guys was done without looking at the non-PD stuff as a reference? Like a PD pub which was positioned at the corner of two CC-BY-SA streets, whose coordinates, therefore is (arguably) non-PD? Or PD rivers that went down the middle of a CC-BY-SA cycle-map-contours-background-in-potlatch valley? The sooner we're united behind one licence the better. Otherwise things will just be like the Tories not wanting to say what they'd do better. Politics thrown in for a laugh. -- Bruce Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Users whose contributions are in the public domain
Vincent MEURISSE wrote: I don't understand why some users want their work in PD. The goal of osm is to have a map of the world freely available for anyone. But with PD someone (eg google) can take all the work of osm, correct and complete it, and copyright it in a way that osm cannot reuse the modification. So the copyrighted map will be better than the free one. I know this debate. It is carried out by BSD'lers versus GPL'ers constantly and depending on what your respective definition of freedom is, each side can be right. There is just no universal answer what constitutes free use. As a PD'ler I can tell you that I just want to avoid that we have to display a 1000 names of contributors in a corner of our map, that I would like to be able to overlay data on an OSM map without having to worry whether I am allowed to do that, etc. The license cc by-sa is a good protection against that as it will always allow osm to use derivate work of the original map. If you have ever looked at our legal list, you will have noticed that it is basically impossible to follow that license, that we don't even get it right ourselves. Nobody can tell you what will constitute a derivative work and what not. If you ask for permissive uses and the only answer you will get from the organization that produces the data ask a lawyer, we can't/won't tell you, then that license is clearly not right. spaetz ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Users whose contributions are in the public domain
Hi, And where all the data entered by the PD guys was done without looking at the non-PD stuff as a reference? Exactly, it's all in the meta data ,-) caveat=user had proprietary map in top drawer of desk while mapping that Bye Frederik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Users whose contributions are in the public domain
On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 6:36 AM, Vincent MEURISSE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't understand why some users want their work in PD. The goal of osm is to have a map of the world freely available for anyone. But with PD someone (eg google) can take all the work of osm, correct and complete it, and copyright it in a way that osm cannot reuse the modification. So the copyrighted map will be better than the free one. And while they're taking the data, correcting and completing it, we'll be continuing to update and improve our copy, so what have they gained? Imagine if Wikipedia was public domain, and you made the same argument there. Certainly one could take a complete copy of Wikipedia, try to correct all errors, and publish it as your own work, but I doubt you could ever truly create something better than the mass of Wikipedia users. For me, it seems ironic that a project spawned from licensing issues over map data has found itself in a situation where licensing issues are still a problem, and hopefully the license update will resolve these and make using OSM data easier. Why else are we contributing this data if not for people to *use* it? -Ted ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Users whose contributions are in the public domain
On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 9:38 PM, Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, While I have the PD-user template on my user page and would encourage like-minded folks to do the same, I feel it is mostly a political statement than of real practical benefit. +1 Some time in the far future I will create a clean mirror of OSM that contains only data never touched by people who don't do PD. And where all the data entered by the PD guys was done without looking at the non-PD stuff as a reference? Like a PD pub which was positioned at the corner of two CC-BY-SA streets, whose coordinates, therefore is (arguably) non-PD? Or PD rivers that went down the middle of a CC-BY-SA cycle-map-contours-background-in-potlatch valley? Good luck with that :-P Cheers, Andy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Users whose contributions are in the public domain
On Fri, 2008-05-02 at 17:01 +0100, Andy Allan wrote: And where all the data entered by the PD guys was done without looking at the non-PD stuff as a reference? Like a PD pub which was positioned at the corner of two CC-BY-SA streets, whose coordinates, therefore is (arguably) non-PD? Or PD rivers that went down the middle of a CC-BY-SA cycle-map-contours-background-in-potlatch valley? The sooner we're united behind one licence the better. Otherwise things will just be like the Tories not wanting to say what they'd do better. Politics thrown in for a laugh. -- Bruce Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
