Whats important to you? Please answer this ~20 second poll: http://sineltor.selfip.org/osm.php Thanks! Joseph
You should rotate the options randomly and also try some of the consequences in the question also a) Would you like OSM to always be inferior to TeleAtlas and Navteq and probably die (PD license) b) Would you like OSM to be the best map on the planet (viral license)) c) This requires more than 20 seconds thought, please let me review the history of BSD vs. GPL and consult some IP lawyers On 2 Nov 2008, at 23:17, Joseph Gentle wrote: > Whats important to you? Please answer this ~20 second poll: > > http://sineltor.selfip.org/osm.php > > Thanks! > Joseph > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk <at> openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > Best Steve
Steve: I disagree with your opinion. So do _many_ others. I think OSM would be vastly improved by being more open and free. I think our maps would be improved with more mapping and less lawyering. However, this is not the place for that argument. That argument's place is the legal-talk mailing list. Anyone interested in reading the relevant discussions can read the archives: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2008-October/thread.html#1532 or join the legal-talk mailing list properly: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk -J On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 6:23 PM, SteveC <steve <at> asklater.com> wrote: > You should rotate the options randomly and also try some of the consequences > in the question also > > a) Would you like OSM to always be inferior to TeleAtlas and Navteq and > probably die (PD license) > b) Would you like OSM to be the best map on the planet (viral license)) > c) This requires more than 20 seconds thought, please let me review the > history of BSD vs. GPL and consult some IP lawyers > > > > On 2 Nov 2008, at 23:17, Joseph Gentle wrote:(Continue reading)
On 2 Nov 2008, at 23:35, Joseph Gentle wrote: > Steve: > > I disagree with your opinion. So do _many_ others. and so _many_ others disagree with you > I think OSM would be vastly improved by being more open and free. I > think our maps would be improved with more mapping and less lawyering. Under your definition of free. > However, this is not the place for that argument. That argument's > place is the legal-talk mailing list. Which makes me wonder why you posted the poll here then? Can't you guys think more than 5 minutes ahead and realise the only way you will be happy and viral people will be happy is with parallel projects? That way us viral people will just take all your work and always have a better map. Best Steve
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 6:39 PM, SteveC <steve <at> asklater.com> wrote: >> However, this is not the place for that argument. That argument's >> place is the legal-talk mailing list. > > Which makes me wonder why you posted the poll here then? It was your idea - as you said, only asking the legal-talk mailing list wouldn't give data representative of the opinions of the wider OSM community. > Can't you guys think more than 5 minutes ahead and realise the only way you > will be happy and viral people will be happy is with parallel projects? That > way us viral people will just take all your work and always have a better > map. Forking mapping work would be bad for everyone. The public domain will benefit OSM. Even if fighting teleatlas / etc is important to you, remember: Those guys can _never_ compete with free. Anywhere OSM has good maps, teleatlas & friends will be out of business. Please stop spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt. You are not serving your community. -J > Best >(Continue reading)
El Lunes, 3 de Noviembre de 2008, Joseph Gentle escribió: > The public domain will benefit OSM. Could we stop making PD-vs-SA flamewars that will lead nowhere, please? Thanks, -- -- ---------------------------------- Iván Sánchez Ortega <ivan <at> sanchezortega.es> Un ordenador no es un televisor ni un microondas, es una herramienta compleja.
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk <at> openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
2008/11/3 Iván Sánchez Ortega <ivan <at> sanchezortega.es>: > Could we stop making PD-vs-SA flamewars that will lead nowhere, please? > > Thanks, I'm sorry for reigniting the flamewar. My intention was merely to get some data. However, I'd rather have some argument here than Steve's inflammatory remarks uncontested. I would be happy to continue this debate, but not here. Thanks for your feedback everyone. -J
> -----Original Message----- > From: talk-bounces <at> openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk- > bounces <at> openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Gentle > Sent: 03 November 2008 10:10 > To: Iván Sánchez Ortega > Cc: talk <at> openstreetmap.org > Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] A super quick poll > > 2008/11/3 Iván Sánchez Ortega <ivan <at> sanchezortega.es>: > > Could we stop making PD-vs-SA flamewars that will lead nowhere, please? > > > > Thanks, > > I'm sorry for reigniting the flamewar. My intention was merely to get > some data. However, I'd rather have some argument here than Steve's > inflammatory remarks uncontested. > > I would be happy to continue this debate, but not here. > > Thanks for your feedback everyone. > The correct list for this debate is legal-general and that was the one place where it was not discussed which I find surprising. I have posted the original poll to legal-general here with my comments: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-general/2008-November/000009. html If people are interested in the licencing debate then please subscribe to legal-general here. http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-general(Continue reading)
On 3 Nov 2008, at 02:09, Joseph Gentle wrote: > 2008/11/3 Iván Sánchez Ortega <ivan <at> sanchezortega.es>: >> Could we stop making PD-vs-SA flamewars that will lead nowhere, >> please? >> >> Thanks, > > I'm sorry for reigniting the flamewar. My intention was merely to get > some data. However, I'd rather have some argument here than Steve's > inflammatory remarks uncontested. Inflammatory like "The public domain will benefit OSM." as if it's a statement of fact? Anyway I'll join the fun on legal-general. Best Steve
On 3 Nov 2008, at 00:12, Iván Sánchez Ortega wrote: > El Lunes, 3 de Noviembre de 2008, Joseph Gentle escribió: >> The public domain will benefit OSM. > > Could we stop making PD-vs-SA flamewars that will lead nowhere, > please? http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/funny-pictures-basement-cat-vs-ceiling-cat.jpg Best Steve
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 7:59 AM, Joseph Gentle <josephg <at> gmail.com> wrote: > The public domain will benefit OSM. What incentive would anyone have to add datasets to OSM if it were PD? Surely it would be easier and less risky for them to keep their own work in a separate database and combine it with OSM later so they get a better map than everyone else, hence competitive advantage. Why would they bother to share their work unnecessarily? Sharealike at least rewards people who create free data, by allowing them access to more. At the very least it isn't structured to discourage* generation of free data In this case, it isn't the 'PD license' itself but copyright law which encourages selfish behaviour, and by pretending that nobody else cares about copyright, PD shows itself as naive.
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 10:09 AM, OJ W <ojwlists <at> googlemail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 7:59 AM, Joseph Gentle <josephg <at> gmail.com> wrote: >> The public domain will benefit OSM. > > What incentive would anyone have to add datasets to OSM if it were PD? > Surely it would be easier and less risky for them to keep their own > work in a separate database and combine it with OSM later so they get > a better map than everyone else, hence competitive advantage. Why > would they bother to share their work unnecessarily? This suggests that merging two datasets is low cost, which I think we know from experience simply isn't true. The situation you suggest isn't feasable simple because combining data privately isn't cost-effective in any way. OSM will win because it's got a community that contributes and fixes stuff, not because we have a viral licence. OSM would simply outdevelop any competitor, even if it was under PD. Oops, this discussion shouldn't be here, sorry :) Have a nice day, -- -- Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog <at> gmail.com> http://svana.org/kleptog/
2008/11/3 OJ W <ojwlists <at> googlemail.com>: > On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 7:59 AM, Joseph Gentle <josephg <at> gmail.com> wrote: >> The public domain will benefit OSM. > > What incentive would anyone have to add datasets to OSM if it were PD? > Surely it would be easier and less risky for them to keep their own > work in a separate database and combine it with OSM later so they get > a better map than everyone else, hence competitive advantage. Why > would they bother to share their work unnecessarily? > > Sharealike at least rewards people who create free data, by allowing > them access to more. At the very least it isn't structured to > discourage* generation of free data > > In this case, it isn't the 'PD license' itself but copyright law which > encourages selfish behaviour, and by pretending that nobody else cares > about copyright, PD shows itself as naive. If you were right, the Apache Foundation with all it's software would be a failure. How is it then, that the Apache web server is the most successful webserver ever? With the Apache license, I could keep my enhancements to myself and then get a competitive atvantage according to your logic. And it might be that some do that, but most see the advantage in contributing to the community. I admit that data and software is somewhat different, but I don't think your logic holds at all. Choosing between a SA-type and PD-type license should not be governed by religious beliefs, but what you want to achieve. And there are reasons for both. And I don't think openstreetmap will die of the "wrong type" is used. Just evolve in a different way.(Continue reading)
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 8:59 AM, Joseph Gentle <josephg <at> gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 6:39 PM, SteveC <steve <at> asklater.com> wrote: >> the only way you >> will be happy and viral people will be happy is with parallel projects? That >> way us viral people will just take all your work and always have a better >> map. > > Forking mapping work would be bad for everyone. > > The public domain will benefit OSM. Why not, make a list of all people who want public domain, then download the 16GBs of planet dumps and diffs necessary to get all history. Analyze all history; extracting the nodes and ways that are contributed PD only, thus creating a subset of the planet dump which is PD. I agree there are license problems with this, but the intent is more acceptable, and it would be interesting to see. If you want to discuss license go to legal-talk. Regards /Erik
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 9:24 AM, Erik Johansson <erjohan <at> gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 8:59 AM, Joseph Gentle <josephg <at> gmail.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 6:39 PM, SteveC <steve <at> asklater.com> wrote: >>> the only way you >>> will be happy and viral people will be happy is with parallel projects? That >>> way us viral people will just take all your work and always have a better >>> map. >> >> Forking mapping work would be bad for everyone. >> >> The public domain will benefit OSM. > > Why not, make a list of all people who want public domain, then > download the 16GBs of planet dumps and diffs necessary to get all > history. Analyze all history; extracting the nodes and ways that are > contributed PD only, thus creating a subset of the planet dump which > is PD. Just on a technical note, that doesn't get you all the history as you miss multi-edits per week, plus planet files didn't always include the user. You'd need a full history dump from the database for that (and access to the pre-0.5 node, segment and way histories too). On the license note ffs guys, legal-talk-general i believe, where you can continue to disagree fundamentally without bothering the rest of us. Vote: I really don't care. Dave
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 9:31 AM, Dave Stubbs <osm.list <at> randomjunk.co.uk> wrote: > On the license note ffs guys, legal-talk-general i believe, http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-general It's an entire mailing list set up so this un-resolvable (to a large extent) discussion can be kept away from more productive stuff. Please everyone refrain from rehashing arguments from legal-talk@ on talk@ when we just decided last week they weren't even appropriate for legal-talk@ in the first place and made a dedicated legal-general@ list instead. Cheers, Andy
public domain will benefit OSM.
>
> Why not, make a list of all people who want public domain, then
> download the 16GBs of planet dumps and diffs necessary to get all
> history. Analyze all history; extracting the nodes and ways that are
How for example?
Way # 12564789654321
History
* Edited by allmycontributionsarePD at 2008-10-24T13:37:46+01:00
* Edited by allmycontrubtionsareCC at 2008-10-17T10:12:06+01:00
* Edited by allmycontrubtionsareCC at 2008-01-17T11:57:42+00:00
* Edited by allmycontrubtionsareCC at 2008-01-06T11:59:57+00:00
* Edited by allmycontrubtionsareCC at 2008-01-03T02:18:04+00:00
* Edited by allmycontrubtionsareCC at 2008-01-03T02:17:53+00:00
* Edited by allmycontributionsarePD at 2007-12-24T05:08:30+00:00
* Edited by allmycontrubtionsareCC at 2007-12-19T06:23:53+00:00
* Edited by allmycontributionsarePD at 2007-09-06T22:19:14+01:00
cheers,
maning
--
--
|---------|----------------------------------------------------------|
| __.-._ |"Ohhh. Great warrior. Wars not make one great." -Yoda |
| '-._"7' |"Freedom is still the most radical idea of all" -N.Branden|
| /'.-c |Linux registered user #402901, http://counter.li.org/ |
| | /T |http://esambale.wikispaces.com|
| _)_/LI
|---------|----------------------------------------------------------|
(Continue reading)On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 10:35 AM, maning sambale <emmanuel.sambale <at> gmail.com> wrote: > public domain will benefit OSM. >> >> Why not, make a list of all people who want public domain, then >> download the 16GBs of planet dumps and diffs necessary to get all >> history. Analyze all history; extracting the nodes and ways that are > You didn't read the whole sentence: >>ways that are >>contributed PD only, > * Edited by allmycontributionsarePD at 2008-10-24T13:37:46+01:00 > * Edited by allmycontrubtionsareCC at 2008-10-17T10:12:06+01:00 > * Edited by allmycontributionsarePD at 2007-12-24T05:08:30+00:00 Becomes CC when a CC user contribute, the way before that can be included. True this will miss all ways that are changed between week updates, but I believe it's a very good approximation. All this shouldn't be hard to do if you want PD OSM and know a tiny bit of programming, this would also be a lot more productive than talking about it here. Regards /Erik
Phooee, all these lists to choose from. Probably most sensible on legal-talk, I think (so followups to there). Erik Johansson wrote: > On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 10:35 AM, maning sambale > <emmanuel.sambale@...> wrote: > You didn't read the whole sentence: >>> ways that are contributed PD only, Of course at this point your eye is mysteriously drawn to the elephant in the room, which is "what deserves copyright protection?". Adding a couple of nodes to a way to neaten out the curve: no way. Simple tracing from Yahoo or NPE: nope, probably not, unless your jurisdiction is _really_ friendly towards "sweat of the brow". (Most aren't AIUI.) Putting your GPS on the dashboard, following a road for 30 miles, getting home, uploading the track, then faithfully tracing along it: doesn't look much like original creative work to me. Large-scale I-plucked-this-out-of-my-ass "creative mapping" bearing no relation to the facts on the ground, like someone has just done in Cheadle, Staffordshire, UK: yeah, that probably deserves copyright protection. And taking outside and shooting. cheers Richard(Continue reading)
> > On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 10:35 AM, maning sambale > > <emmanuel.sambale@...> wrote: > > You didn't read the whole sentence: > >>> ways that are contributed PD only, > > Of course at this point your eye is mysteriously drawn to the elephant > in the room, which is "what deserves copyright protection?". > > Adding a couple of nodes to a way to neaten out the curve: no way. > > Simple tracing from Yahoo or NPE: nope, probably not, unless your > jurisdiction is _really_ friendly towards "sweat of the brow". (Most > aren't AIUI.) > > Putting your GPS on the dashboard, following a road for 30 miles, > getting home, uploading the track, then faithfully tracing along it: > doesn't look much like original creative work to me. > > Large-scale I-plucked-this-out-of-my-ass "creative mapping" bearing no > relation to the facts on the ground, like someone has just done in > Cheadle, Staffordshire, UK: yeah, that probably deserves copyright > protection. And taking outside and shooting. > Imho, neither talk nor legal-talk (the two lists to which this post was made) are the appropriate venue for this discussion. Should this discussion more appropriately be continued on legal-general@...? It's chicken and egg here; until people use the new list it won't be used.(Continue reading)
On Monday 03 November 2008 01:09:41 pm SteveC wrote: > Can't you guys think more than 5 minutes ahead and realise the only > way you will be happy and viral people will be happy is with parallel > projects? That way us viral people will just take all your work and > always have a better map. and, in addition, a poll with insufficient choices is not a good poll. Public domain != BSD style licenses anyway. -- -- regards Kenneth Gonsalves Associate NRC-FOSS http://nrcfosshelpline.in/web/
SteveC <steve <at> asklater.com> writes: > Can't you guys think more than 5 minutes ahead and realise the only > way you will be happy and viral people will be happy is with parallel > projects? That way us viral people will just take all your work and > always have a better map. Exactly. I mean the first sentence. I would be most happy if I could both to donate my work to public domain and advance, among the others, the fine OSM project. All the better if it could be possible without a need to use double as much time or to do just half of the mapping.
RSS Feed