[OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

[John Smith]

On 8 December 2010 18:57, Eugene Alvin Villar <seav80 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree with Frederik's very nice comparison of OSM with volunteer
> organizations as well.
>
> I guess OSM should be viewed as a collection of geodata to which
> Frederik, John, Liz, Steve, Steve, Steve, Steve, Richard, Richard,
> Richard, et al have contributed to, instead of as a collection of
> Frederik's geodata, John's geodata, Liz' geodata, Steve's geodata,
> etc.

I agree 100% with both of you, however as always the details are what
trips things up.

Details really do matter, in this case various people, myself included
have preconceived ideas and even ideals, one of, if not the main the
reason I volunteered my time and various other reasoures to contribute
to OSM was the strong share-a-like license, meaning I share with you
and you share with me.

However, others would like to push their morals, their ideals and
their agendas to shape OSM more to what they think things should be,
in effect they are hijacking a process that was supposed to re-enforce
and make stronger the share a like freedoms and I find this
fundamentally wrong and immoral.

After all these same people obviously weren't given any misleading or
false impression about the terms that they were offering to volunteer
their resources, in fact some people spent considerable effort
researching the terms they would be contributing under and those
people are now being coerced into a situation where they only chose to
give freely because the expectation was a strong share a like license
on the data.

This means companies that have oodles of lawyers don't have an unfair
advantage over a single person startup, where the big company finds
and exploits loop holes to get all the benefits with out being
required to give anything back to help make things better for
everyone, not just their own commercial interests where they get to
keep anything that would improve things for everyone else, and this is
what truly saddens me, and compells me to try and do something about
what I see a few individuals selling out the rest of the project for a
fist full of gold.

You have to wonder, if someone is paid by a company and is on the
board of OSM-F, or even just a working group where their loyalties
lie, with a hobby that may or may not be treated as a means to a
better end for them personally, to their employer who is making it
possible for you to pay the bills or to the project so the project has
the best possible outcome which active promotes giving back and not
just taking to exploit it for as much as you can.

I was hoping I could pen something a little more succinct, however the
bottom line is OSM has a history of a strong share a like license,
even if some may consider it unenforcible the spirit and ideals to me
are just as important, and now that is being undermined for various
reasons, not all based on greed or being selfish, however as the
saying goes, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

The whole licensing thing has been hijacked by special interest
groups, it's been said long and loud that the license had to change so
that it wasn't just spirit and ideals, but something that may end up
having actual bite to it if it really needed it, but the ODBL isn't in
the same spirit or ideal as CC-by-SA, it is considerably weaker in
various aspects, some of which may even be intentional loop holes that
may even look innocent.

However I think I could live with the ODBL, while it's not as strongly
share a like, it still has some semblance of that ideal, but what I
cannot and will not agree to is the CTs, there is no limitation on
that to even restrict future licenses to the same ideals that myself
and many others were under the impression when we signed up.

Instead were at the mercy almost of special interests that would love
nothing more than to basically ignore the fact of the ideals that not
only encouraged people to sign up in the first place, but to keep
coming back and contributing more and more of their time for the sole
benefit of the project it self because they were under the impression
that others would also give back to the project and in turn continue
to build up not only a community of people, but an environment which
encouraged people to share rather than hoard it away so no one else
can benefit.

Why is it that contributers are being treated with such gross lies
about why we need to change the license and then continue to tell
people that the new license is more or less the same but better than
the new one and over time has gone from something that may have been
similar to cc-by-sa but realistically has been watered down and
weakened so much that ethos and ideals that were once there have been
cast aside, and that to claim the new license is like the old one is
something sleazy used car sales could only do with a straight face.

Perhaps I have been a little over zealous and annoying about this
topic in the past, but here I was under the impression that OSM
couldn't get enough of passionate people to help make this project
better with each passing day, but that view has been shattered with
all the dirty and sleazy tactics and methods that have been employed
to push through something that many probably realise deep down inside
isn't inline with the expectations of many of the original
contributors.

Some of the comments I've seen posted by some sees contributors as a
source of free labour, that can be pushed about like some lowly paid
employee that should do as they are told and they should like it
because at the end of the day all their hard work and effort can go
into increasing the freedom of large multinational corporations while
at the same time those freedoms given to the companies and the
contributors end up with less and less freedoms, and the environment
of sharing is merely an illusion, the same kind of illusion parents
feed their children about always telling the truth, only to have them
shattered years later when reality sinks in that lies are far more
common, and not only that those that lie best, steal the most, and
kiss the right asses always win over the poor soul who is kind to
everyone and always sees the best in others, even when at the end of
the day that sense of trust was used against them over and over again
until they no longer see the world as a beautiful place, but as an
evil selfish place where those with the least morals and the
motivation to do what ever it takes to get ahead in life, regardless
of how many people you walk all over, abuse and throw out with the
garbage, just so you end up on top, just so you can get the slightly
bigger house, even though the one you are in now is too big, just so
you can try and buy that soul back that you killed so many years ago.

I doubt I could bring myself to to some of the things that have to be
done to push things through, I doubt I'd sleep well at night if I
tried something like this, then again I don't have the DNA to become a
sleazy used car sales man either.

It's quite clear that there will be no compromises, the special
interests got there first and they seem to hold all the cards. If I'm
given an ultimatum over this, I'll end up using my resources to
benefit those with more honest morals, and that treat contributors as
the most precious part of the project, who will listen and more to the
point give the contributors the freedoms, who will give contributors
special considerations, who will give contributors the respect and
admiration for their selfless acts, rather than barking out orders and
expecting them to ask how high they should jump.

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, similar things happen and ultimate
ruin lots of other projects that start out with the best of intents,
only to have things come crashing down in the end.

Human nature is many things, it's just a shame deceit and bulling
seems to be the most common.