[OSM-dev] Tile usage without proper identification
simon at poole.ch
Fri Aug 12 19:38:37 UTC 2016
Am 12.08.2016 um 20:27 schrieb Matthijs Melissen:
> I would tend to disagree.
> Our Articles of Association state:
> | 3. The Foundation is established for the purposes listed below:
> | (1) encouraging the growth, development and distribution of free geospatial
> | data; and
> | (2) providing geospatial data for anybody to use and share.
> To me this would include the distribution of geospational data in
> compiled form, i.e. as a map.
The OSMF AoA do not prescribe any specific way how the purposes should
be achieved and traditionally the project has left distribution to end
users to third parties, commercial and others (see
> I think it would be great if we had the resources to provide free maps
> to anybody, including commercial companies. I realize there are
> practical considerations that make this infeasible at the moment, but
> I think it would be a nice target to aim for. The easier and cheaper
> to use Openstreetmap-data, the more people will use it, which will
> hopefully in turn lead to more contributors and better data.
The WMF on the other hand has historically had tight control over its
distribution channels and built its whole business model around that.
Which is one of the reasons that they have felt a lot of pressure
recently because they have been losing significant parts of that
control. The OSM model removes all that stress from the community and
has proven quite effective none the less.
> I would also like to point out that there might be a conflict of
> interest here between commercial operators of OpenStreetMap services,
> and the rest of the community.
Well, despite slightly confused recent blog posts from some of the
commercial players claiming the opposite, the OSM community has
consistently elected a dominating majority of such operators (commercial
and others) to the OSMF board for many many years with typically only
one to two token representatives of the mapping community. As a result I
have to assume that the community is happy with the OSMF strategy as it is.
PS: this discussion would seem to be rather off topic on the dev mailing
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the dev