[Osmf-talk] The license/fork discussion: A solution proposal
ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen
g.gremmen at cetest.nl
Tue Aug 24 15:12:36 BST 2010
> The first problem that comes to my mind is that every node/way may
> (and probably will) be edited multiple times by users with different
> license choices.
that is not a problem for the community but for
those who want to make a business with our data: "others".
They will get an extract, more or less complete, conforming to their choice of
license to accept.
It don't stop the community from continuing to create
a better map.
The history problem happens also when all contributors that are not happy
with the new ODBL license will withdraw their data.
That is bound to happen soon, once the OSMF imposes
the ODbL license change on the community (that's how it feels).
The only way to keep all on-board is to make the license
part of the system.
My solution is not a final solution, it makes it possible to
continue OSM and see which license survives.
By creating multiple maps based on license restrictions,
we can create a live impression of what will happen
if we fork, stay on CCbySA, ODbL or PD, or
any combination of it.
As the license property only decides how data
is exported to 3rd parties, there is no change to the current
situation for all OSM contributors.
Once we all agree on a final license (no license?) , OSM will
show to be mature , and can be exported as a whole again.
We have to discuss on implementation, but for the moment
anyone can continue to edit/map using the license of their preference.
Before printing, think about the environment.
Van: juliocostaz at gmail.com [mailto:juliocostaz at gmail.com] Namens Julio Costa
Verzonden: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 2:51 PM
Aan: ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen
CC: osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
Onderwerp: Re: [Osmf-talk] The license/fork discussion: A solution proposal
The first problem that comes to my mind is that every node/way may
(and probably will) be edited multiple times by users with different
license choices. How will we solve this? The first contributors choice
rules the rest of the node/ways life? Will we implement a way to
export the whole DB with the last version (in the license of your
choice) of every node/way? (that probably will violate the previous
editions of that node/way done under the other license. This under the
supposition that the first contributors choice doesn't rules the
My point is that this kind of idea, even though well intended, seems
Even though I am not very happy with CT3, I do understand that the
license must be one. And that if someone is truly uncomfortable with
the ODbL will eventually have to fork (this under the assumption that
most of the contributors accept the new license and CT).
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 3:17 AM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert
Gremmen <g.gremmen at cetest.nl> wrote:
> This is a crossposting with OSM-talk. My apologies. But I think it is
> There is a long violent discussion about the OSM license, the choice to
> be made and
> some people event want to leave OSM and start a fork. This discussion
> also lead to moderation and too much emotional talk.
> This eventually will lead to the end of OSM, a really unwanted
> I therefore have the following proposal:
> A fork as stipulated should not be necessarily about a group of people
> leaving OSM , but about
> we (OSM) deciding to continue in two or more future directions,
> covered by different licenses, and maybe finally decide which license
> fits best.
> This would require the OSM database to include a extra field for each
> and every item indicating the license
> the data was provided by its contributor. The license choice can be made
> in the users profile.
> For most of OSM there is no difference.
> The license is only relevant once data is extracted to external
> External parties will therefore always know under what license any node
> and any way of the
> database had been granted to them.
> The map server and most applications at would remain as they are,
> our own applications are not license sensitive.
> We may however create a second or more maps showing only the data from
> specific licenses
> and enabling OSM-ers to evaluate the consequences of their choices.
> I think this is the only way to solve this everlasting and destructive
> license discussion.
> It requires however, some flexibility of mind, and the trust that OSM
> will not
> abuse the choice made by its contributors. As the database and the
> license field will
> be visible to all of us, I trust that will be not a major problem.
> Gert Gremmen
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
More information about the osmf-talk