[Osmf-talk] Local Chapters criteria

[Felix Delattre]

On 7/23/19 9:14 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> This is something that cannot be stated boldly enough: If you are not a
> registered local chapter, and if you want to use the names OpenStreetMap
> or State of the Map for your domains, events, or registered business,
> then you need to have a license from the OSMF to do that as per the
> trademark guidelines.
>
> If you use these names without having a license then the OSMF can - and
> actually should, if the OSMF takes its trademarks seriously - stop you
> from doing that.
>
> This could pose difficulties for "proto" chapters of whom we expect to
> see some track record but we don't allow them to call themselves
> "OpenStreetMap $country" - they would have to apply before they use the
> name...

Hi all - sorry for the long email - skip it if you want.

I'm wondering whether not all communities started using the name
OSM+Country without asking OSMF before :)

The local community I've been mostly involved in (OSM Nicaragua),
emerged firstly by people coming together because we wanted to work on
that open data map - we felt welcomed to do so. When we started
organizing the first events a suitable name was needed. At that time we
just combined OSM with the country name (similar we/people did with
Debian Nicaragua, Drupal Nicaragua, …), we created a logo [1] and
registered social media accounts (like [2]) and did everything to get
people on board. We never asked for permission to use the OSM name with
country. We worked in the spirit of a Free Software community and we
were connected with the global community from the beginning. You can
call me naive, I expected this to be the most usual way all or at least
most OSM communities kicked-off.

Out of true curiosity: was there any local community that first had
asked the OSMF for permission before using the name of OSM? (What about
the elephants? Germany, US, France, Belgium?)

I don't have any concrete answer to challenge risen here, I’m just
worried we put higher burdens on new communities, than we have put on
the ones that are around for many years. I do think we (the OSMF) should
care, because definitively trademarks can be used abusively, and the
OSMF must be able to take away permissions to use the name in those
cases. Especially if groups demonstrate not to stick to our values
(non-commercial, democratic structure, …?). In my opinion, being too
overruled embarks the likely risk to stop emerging pioneers from
continuing because of not feeling sufficiently recognized and
auto-determined. And I do think we need space for communities to start
as grass-rooty as the one Nicaragua, and based on persons’ trust and
initiatives,

On the side of registering an association, I wanted to comment that this
is culturally and legally quite different in the countries all over the
world: For example, in Nicaragua we had several attempts over the years
to create an NGO for Free Software, but it is quite difficult to
register an association there, because the national law requires each
and every association to be approved by the parliament; the community
felt more important about the group and people than about the legal
status. On the other side - another example - in Germany there is
already a well established term ("Vereinsmeierei") to describe the
cultural importance Germans give to associations, and registering one is
not such a big deal.

Requiring too many bureaucratic burdens makes it hard for local
communities to get a voice in OSMF, in those countries associations are
more difficult register. One, out of many aspects that might contribute
to the situation that a lot of southern communities are not taking part
here in OSMF as much as the ones I called elephants before.

If you reached here, thanks for reading. Have a nice day.
Felix