<HTML>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<span style="font-weight: bold;"></span>I have only rarely made contributions to this list and never to the legal or LWG lists because I prefer to do things rather than talk about it. I have been contributing to OSM for over 5 years and, last I looked, I was about 800th in number of nodes and ways edited world wide. These contributions have been a result of surveys, fixing validation errors (often with the aid of Nearmap) and tracing ways from Nearmap. None of my work was due to data import.<BR>
<BR>
Despite this my opinion on the license change was never asked for and it was only on 6 Feb 2011 that anyone from OSM bothered to inform me of the change and ask why I had not accepted the CT. Of course I had seen mostly second hand information on the talk-au list.<BR>
<BR>
What has spurred me into this e-mail is the comment that resolving the issue with Nearmap was a good example of OSM-F addressing AU concerns. The resulting resolution with Nearmap is, in fact, why I am no longer contributing to OSM. I do not trust BING from a license and location accuracy prospective, and it does not have the resolution to do some of the things I could do with Nearmap such as picking up speed zones and traffic lights. Also it was about the same time that OSM-F stopped edits from those who had not agreed to the new CT that Nearmap announced the Nearmap users could agree to the CT but could no longer map with it.<BR>
<BR>
Perhaps I have been spoiled by Nearmap, but I do not want to have a second best mapping experience without it, along with the provision to change licensing in the CT that, it is with deep regret, that I have stopped contributing to OSM_F. I plan to contribute to FOSM instead, but with a lost enthusiasm. <BR>
<BR>
I hope I am wrong, but I see the splits caused by the license and CT change as a huge setback to both the building and use of open mapping. <BR>
<BR>
Regards,<BR>
Roy Rankin<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<span style="font-weight: bold;">On Mon Jul 11 11:55 , Steve Coast <steve@asklater.com> sent:<BR>
<BR>
</steve@asklater.com></span><blockquote style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(245, 245, 245); margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px; padding-left: 5px; padding-right: 0px;"><BR>
<BR>
We looked around for all the people claiming that we've been ignoring them and can't actually find any posts by them on the legal lists or to the LWG for many of the people involved. Of course, with so many fake names being used it's hard to be sure they weren't raised under a different pseudonym. From what I've seen, the LWG took all of the concerns very seriously and spent an awful lot of time, on an individual basis, trying to resolve them. Nearmap of course being a good example.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</blockquote>
</HTML>
<BR>