[OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Mixing OSM and FOSM data

Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org
Wed Jan 18 22:33:21 GMT 2012


On 01/18/2012 05:46 PM, andrzej zaborowski wrote:
> In one of the cases I'm talking about, those people never had the
> intention to deal with OpenStreetMap, they had a similar project to
> OSM under CC-By-SA long before OSM existed.  Now OSM uses their map
> data and entire cities initially imported from their project are shown
> green.  This is a consequence of how LWG wrote the Contibutor Terms
> and the cleanness-criteria.

If somewhere an "entire city [is] shown green" then this means that 
*someone* in OSM has added "odbl=clean" to all the objects. That person, 
and not LWG, bears the responsibility. Can you point to an example?

>> I can understand people when they can't agree to the CT's for a variety of
>> reasons, but why they would feel 'cheated' when the rest of us are merely
>> trying to continue where they left off minimizing the damage, is beyond me.
> And this is something I can not understand.  Say that you're
> contributing to a project with some purpose or license.  Now a
> subgroup of contributors wants to change this and continue without any
> losses.  If the original contributors don't think the new direction is
> correct, why should they all have to help that subgroup?

I think that Jo does not talk about "helping" (in terms of doing work), 
but just about letting what you call a "subgroup" have the data. I.e. 
they don't have to actively spend time; the work is already done; all it 
needs is a "yes".

And while you're right in saying that just because you agree to let 
others have your work und free and open license A it doesn't mean that 
you also like free and open license B, the truth is that from a small 
distance, we're all in the same camp, the group of people who like free 
and open licenses. We might have our differences, some of us have a 
beard and prefer the team "free software" while others are clean-shaved 
and talk about "open source software", and so some this sounds like a 
real big deal, but you only have to take one step back and you'll see 
that basically we're all of the same tribe.

And this is what is difficult to understand. The tribe and its 
"sub-group" are still far closer in culture, ideas, and outlook than the 
tribes on the other side of the river. They should stick together.


Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

More information about the legal-talk mailing list