<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
We had a very similar discussion a week ago here in Switzerland (we
are in the process of founding a national OSM association). I
believe the consensus was, more or less, that nobody would have an
issue with Google joining (google has is largest non-US based site
in Zürich so this is not totally unlikely). <br>
<br>
Membership (expanding this to the OSM-F) in this kind of
organisation normally doesn't require a complete alignment of goals
and purpose (or are we Scientology?) and you will always have
participants that may just want to know what's going on from an
inside pov, and that is quite legitimate. <br>
<br>
Simon<br>
<br>
Am 19.07.2011 13:57, schrieb fh.sainct:<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:33136991.307418.1311076650191.JavaMail.www@wwinf8203"
type="cite">
<p style="margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt" align="left"> </p>
<p style="margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt" align="left">2) On Henk Hoff
question, 'Should there be reasons to deny membership?', and
Frederik Ramm initial allusion to a Google guy being elected, I
fear that like it or not, this boils down to defining what our
competitors are.</p>
<p style="margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt" align="left">Yes,
*competitors*.</p>
<p style="margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt" align="left"> </p>
<p style="margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt" align="left">In the private
industry where I belong (without any relation to mapping
thankfully), strategies are very clear and well defined, and
obviously part of them do concern competitors.</p>
<p style="margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt" align="left">And the
objectives about competitors are clear, explicit, and *not*
nice.</p>
<p style="margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt" align="left"> </p>
<p style="margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt" align="left">There is
absolutely no doubt, Google and the other private mappers are
actively looking for ways to earn more market share, yes, than
OSM. And this including by cloning OSM approaches when useful
(see <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://brainoff.com/weblog/2011/04/11/1635">http://brainoff.com/weblog/2011/04/11/1635</a> in case you
didn't know Google is organizing nice mapping parties).</p>
<p style="margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt" align="left">This is a normal
behavior, some would even say healthy.</p>
<p style="margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt" align="left"> </p>
<p style="margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt" align="left">Part of this
behavior involves 'restituting' competitors strategies.</p>
<p style="margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt" align="left"> </p>
<p style="margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt" align="left">To me it is
obvious that, if given the possibility, Google et al will
definitely step in, whatever the cost --just to know OSM
strategy, and clearly with objectives that are not nice. To say
the least.</p>
<p style="margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt" align="left"> </p>
<p style="margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt" align="left">Now I certainly
have been too hot in my text above, but if I managed to have you
all thinking about what OSM *competitors* are, I'll be happy
already.</p>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" target="_blank"
href="https://compte.laposte.net/inscription/index.do?jeux=2011FOOTER_generique"><img
moz-do-not-send="true" style="margin: 0pt;"
src="http://webmail.laposte.net/webmail/fr_FR/panels/images/pied-page-generique_2.jpg"
alt=""></a><a moz-do-not-send="true">
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
osmf-talk mailing list
osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
</pre>
</a></blockquote>
</body>
</html>