Hello,
Please, do not respond further to this thread. Any further comments will
receive individual moderation.
-Mikel
* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
>________________________________
> From: Emilie Laffray <[email protected]>
>To: "ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen" <[email protected]>
>Cc: [email protected]
>Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 8:43 AM
>Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
>
>
>Hello,
>
>
>I will retract the troll bit as you seem actually to be "enthusiastic" but you
>seriously have to work on the perception that you give to people in the first
>place. Goodwill is something difficult enough to accrue in the first place.
>However, I will not retract the fact that I consider that you are a bit
>disingenuous in your behaviour.
>
>
>Emilie Laffray
>
>
>On 29 May 2012 11:48, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Emilie,
>>
>>I defend 2 legal interests:
>>
>>Mine : I invested time work and money, that I co-licensed under CC-by-SA to
>>the previous OSM
>>OSM: by keeping the OSM database clean of tainted data
>>
>>
>>If you call that trolling ……
>>Sometimes I think that people are called trolls because they defend
>>statements other do not agree with.
>>
>>Sorry Emilie, it’s a pity if that creates some loss of data,
>>but you should take it like a man, and accept the consequences
>>of the route OSM took. Put the liability on those who are
>>responsible for that !
>>
>>Gert
>>
>>
>>
>>Van:Emilie Laffray [mailto:[email protected]]
>>Verzonden: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 12:19 PM
>>Aan: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen
>>CC: Thomas Davie; [email protected]
>>
>>Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
>>
>>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 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. 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. 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).
>>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. 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.
>>
>>Emilie Laffray
>>On 29 May 2012 10:53, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>I did not give you permission to share
>>a private conversation on the list.
>>
>>That is also about copyrights, Davie.
>
>_______________________________________________
>talk mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
