[OSM-legal-talk] Phase 4 and what it means

[Michael Collinson]

I am also very hesitant to have a specific date now and basically 
support Kai's concept. Mostly the date thing is caution, I would like to 
move to Phase 4 as soon as possible but think we can then take our time 
getting as much ODbL coverage as possible. It is also disparate 
situations. At one extreme is ripping out and not replacing data where 
there may be a delayed solution available. At the other extreme, there 
is a local mapper or mapping party fixing up their local area with 
content equal to or better than a contributor who has clearly and 
publicly stated that they have no intention of ever accepting. [BTW, we 
will certainly make a full dump available upon the Phase 4 switch-over]

Since the unknowns and what-ifs are now falling away fast, I suggest we 
focus in on what critical mass is and do what we can do to achieve it. 
My initial criteria with some examples are:

- We should have the numbers. ODbL coverage weighted by size of 
contribution is looking great [1] but we are not there yet. I would like 
to have done our best to reach the large number of previous small and 
lapsed contributors and had a response. This is just beginning to come 
in this weekend. This may have important impact on local mappers.

- Local mappers and communities have had a chance to assess actual 
rather than hypothetical impact in small areas and regions.

- Large-scale individual contributors who would like to accept the new 
terms but feel they can't for some reason have been helped where 
practical and possible.

- Where a specific import or derivation issue exists, short or medium 
term possibilities have been exhausted. In Australia, we may get a 
straight yes/no answer from Nearmap on keeping current contributions. In 
the UK there is the ambiguous position of OS Streetview data. Champions 
for individual blank and yellow tagged entries in  
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue welcome.

Mike

[1] http://matt.dev.openstreetmap.org/treemap.png

On 05/06/2011 03:23, Kai Krueger wrote:
> Frederik Ramm wrote:
>    
>> Now I sense some uncertainty among mappers as to what phase 4 exactly
>> means for them. I know for a fact that among the current disagreeing
>> mappers there are some who intend to stay with OSM and who are just
>> holding out until the last minute; and I know there are some who simply
>> wanted to delay their decision until later.
>>
>>      
> Yes, there are a number of people who have declined to relicense as it is
> the only way available to formally voice ones disagreement with any of a)
> the new licence, b) the CT or c) the process. Nevertheless, they remain
> adamant supports and enthusiasts of OSM. Just that they happen to disagree
> with what is best for the project and without being able to see into the
> future it is pretty much impossible to say for sure which cause of action is
> the best for the project.
>
> So it is important to try and not alienate either side as much as possible.
> Phase 4 is critical in this respect, as it is the first time ones decision
> has actual consequences for mappers and starts locking users out of the
> project, some of whom have put a huge amount of effort into OSM to ensure it
> has become a success and deserve everyones respect. So it is bound to give
> bad blood and result in highly emotional debates.
>
>
> Frederik Ramm wrote:
>    
>> "Do not delete and re-map anything before<date>. We will send out a
>> message to everyone who has not agreed to the license change, and inform
>> them that after that date, mappers are likely to purge non-relicensed
>> data and that if they want their data to remain, they need to redecide
>> before that date."
>>
>>      
> Out of the listed options, I would personally prefer this option most, as it
> imho leaves the most options open. However, rather than a specific date, I
> would advertise the "date" to be the time at which a critical mass is
> reached. I.e. when it becomes clear that sufficient data has successfully
> been relicensed that the damage due to data loss will be acceptable to the
> overall project.
>
> That then really is the point of no return at which one can start a graceful
> damage control by replacing no relicensable data.
>
> At that point I presume OSMF will decide on a formal date on which phase 5
> will begin. In order to give all data users enough time to adapt to the new
> license and consider the consequences, I would expect OSMF to set this date
> at least a month or two in advance, which will then still give mappers a
> reasonable amount of time to start fixing up the holes that the relicensing
> process will produce in the data.
>
> Kai
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/OSM-legal-talk-Phase-4-and-what-it-means-tp6440812p6441026.html
> Sent from the Legal Talk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>
>