[Osmf-talk] Copyright in the Digital Single Market

[Rob Nickerson]

Yes, my understanding of the OSMF is that lack of time is the main blocker
to more action (both at board level but also likely within some working
groups). No conspiracy here and suggesting so isn't going to help get this
task done.

If we all would like to volunteer to start drafting something I'm sure that
would be appreciated. The alternative is that OSMF increases it's number of
paid roles - but people complain about that prospect too.

Best regards,
Rob

On Wed, 12 Sep 2018, 19:05 Emilie Laffray, <emilie.laffray at gmail.com> wrote:

> I can only agree with Mikel here.
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018, 17:48 Mikel Maron <mikel.maron at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Rubbish
>>
>> I don’t have a lot of time right now. Except to say that the Christoph
>> analysis has no basis in reality, and is a zero value conspiracy theory.
>>
>> Mapbox and other corporations have been on the front lines of fighting to
>> fix this legislation for months.
>>
>> I tried to get the OSMF engaged on this months ago, check the board
>> minutes. We’ve been discussing doing something this very week, but there
>> uncertainty about how the osmf becomes political. We at least want to do a
>> blog post but that needs energy for someone to write it.
>>
>> Mikel
>>
>> On Wednesday, September 12, 2018, 5:05 PM, Christoph Hormann <
>> chris_hormann at gmx.de> wrote:
>>
>> On Wednesday 12 September 2018, Manfred A. Reiter wrote:
>> > [...]
>> >
>> > Why doesn't the official representation of the community comment on
>> > these eminently important things?
>> > No tweets, no press release, nothing! - Or did I miss something?
>> >
>> > Is the OSMF aware that politicians may not understand what their
>> > decisions mean for OSM?
>> > May I know, what OSMF did to defend our data and our project like
>> > Wikimedia does?
>> > Or are tweets like this
>> > https://twitter.com/WikimediaDE/status/1039873938598363136 nonsens?
>> > Ortter.com/WikimediaDE/status/1039873938598363136
>> > https://twitter.com/WikimediaDE/status/103987393859836313
>> > cheers
>>
>> I think the explanation is probably mostly that the EU plans perfectly
>> dovetail with the interests of the big corporate OSM data users.  As
>> you could hear at SotM most of them do not want to use the user
>> generated content in unfiltered form anyway and are actively developing
>> their own filtering framework.  There are two scenarios for the future
>> EU legislation on this matter:
>>
>> * there will be an exception from the upload filter requirement that
>> covers OSM.  In that case corporate data users might be required to
>> filter but they do this anyway so this is perfectly fine (and it might
>> help against competition that does not have a filtering
>> infrastructure).
>>
>> * OSM will be required to filter user contributions.  That scenario is
>> fine for corporate data users as well because it would mean OSM already
>> does at least some of the filtering they would want or need to do.
>>
>> Side note:  It is my impression that the campaign agaist this project in
>> Europe suffered from many people still fundamentally misunderstanding
>> the EU.  The EU is primarily a business support organization (with a
>> distinct preference for large businesses obviously).  All this talk
>> about free internet, remix culture etc. that dominated the process was
>> destined to overwhelmingly fall on deaf ears.  The only argument that
>> really counts in Brussels is if it is bad for the European economy.
>> You can find plenty of arguments for that and if the campaign had
>> focussed on that it would have had a much better chance i think (and
>> still does).
>>
>> Also keep in mind that what has been decided today is not an actual
>> piece of legislation, it is a draft that is to go into the negotiation
>> process between parliament, commission and council.  What comes out of
>> this as actual legislation can be and likely will be very different
>> from what has been discussed now.
>>
>> --
>> Christoph Hormann
>> http://www.imagico.de/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> osmf-talk mailing list
>> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> osmf-talk mailing list
>> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>>
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20180912/d21f86a7/attachment.html>