[OSM-legal-talk] CT-compatible data recycling imported nodes

[rhn]

Hi again,

The inevitable data cleaning comes closer and closer, therefore I want to rise the issue again before it's too late (with the new knowledge I got from Simon's answers).

In short, I used old database objects (which were imports from sources incompatible with CT & ODBL) to enter entirely new data into OSM (IDs and some key-value pairs stayed the same). The new data are in commits marked as CT-compatible.
It appears that the automated cleanup process is going to remove that kind of data.

My question is: how to preserve the new data?
I believe that the fact that I surveyed the objects myself and ignored all existing positions/tagging breaks "time-continuity" of the objects, and therefore their old license.
Is it acceptable for me to wait until cleanup is finished, extract that kind of contributions and re-commit them? It's very unlikely that the original author of the imported data is going to relicense it. 

As much as I love contributing to OSM, I don't think I'm going to have the same willpower again to turn a blank 40x40km area into something useable. I don't want to sound negative, but combined with the fact that imports (which I consider a defining characteristic of open-source projects) are much harder now than a few years earlier, I might abandon OSM if this gets thrown away. I'm writing all this precisely because I don't want this to happen.

Cheers,
rhn

> 
> The v0 rule essentially states that allocating an object in the DB 
> doesn't create IP, so if you have an object that has lost all of the 
> attributes it originally had it is essentially a new object.
> 
> However in your case that really doesn't apply (IMHO), because what I've 
> seen from your examples is that you actually imported the data yourself 
> and at least some of the original tags have survived. Note that the data 
> would actually survive the redaction process at this point in time, but 
> naturally you shouldn't have agreed to the CTs in the first place.
> 
> The preferred way to proceed would be for you to get permission to 
> release the data you imported under the ODBL from the original creator 
> in the UMP project, as you probably know there is an effort under way to 
> organize exactly that in Poland.
> 
> Simon
> 
> Am 28.03.2012 22:43, schrieb rhn:
> > Three different examples; all of them were remapped&  verified in respect to location and tags (except of name=* in most cases). That doesn't mean the tags have changed though, sometimes they were imported just right.
> >
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/28099536/history
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/28099539/history
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/28099452/history
> >
> > Could you point me to the v0 rule you're referring to?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > rhn
> >
> >> If you essentially remapped the objects it may be that some or most of
> >> your data would be safe due to the v0 rule (regardless of any other
> >> developments wrt UMP). It is difficult to answer this more definitely
> >> we would need to see some examples.
> >>
> >> Simon
> >>
> >> Am 28.03.2012 22:12, schrieb rhn:
> >>> Hello,
> >>>
> >>> Please excuse me if my question has been asked before, I don't follow this list.
> >>>
> >>> Today I found information about the way data is going to be marked as incompatible - the way I understood it, all ways and nodes are going to be reverted to the latest compatible version (i.e. the one before first CC-only changeset).
> >>>
> >>> This worries me, as it seems the bulk of my changesets will be deleted.
> >>> I focused on an area with data coming nearly exclusively from an incompatible source (UMP). Before a license change was even in plans, I managed to replace the road network almost completely with GPS traces and some landuse data with WMS and traces.
> >>> The problem is, I never bothered too much with replacing the actual database objects (takes too much time), thinking removal of source=* would be enough. Let me mention that I removed source only from  nodes and ways that I had precise data about (and would have deleted if it wasn't a hassle).
> >>>
> >>> My questions are: Is it acceptable to copy the snapshot of my current data that would otherwise get deleted and restore it as CT-compatible?
> >>> If yes, should the backup be performed now or is there going to be a way to access CC data after the license change?
> >>> If not, is there any other way to preserve the data?
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>> rhn
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> legal-talk mailing list
> >>> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> >>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> legal-talk mailing list
> >> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
> > _______________________________________________
> > legal-talk mailing list
> > legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk