[talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...

Alex (Maxious) Sadleir maxious at gmail.com
Thu Apr 7 01:06:08 BST 2011

On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 9:37 AM, David Murn <davey at incanberra.com.au> wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-04-06 at 22:09 +1000, Michael Hampson wrote:
>> So is Phase 4 the end for those that don't agree? What happens to the
>> data if we don't agree? and the data built on top of that data?
> Well, it depends what you read.  According to the wiki, stage 4 is when
> OSM asks the community what will should happen for those who havent
> accepted the licence.  One has to wonder if any of the comments from the
> past year or two will be taken into account when those in power decide
> to ask us mere mushrooms what we think.
>> > For clarity:
>> >
>> > - This will only affect (77,000) contributors who registered before
>> > May 2010 and who have not accepted the new terms as part of the
>> > voluntary re-licensing program.
> For clarity: (according to odbl.de)
> In Australia:
> - This will remove 57% of users
> - This will remove 67% of nodes, 66% of ways and 86% of relations
> In UK:
> - This will remove 65% of users
> - This will remove 40% of nodes, 40% of ways and 10% of relations
> In Europe:
> - This will remove 61% of users
> - This will remove 20% of nodes, 20% of ways and 15% of relations
> It is fairly clear that the Australian issue has very little value to
> those in Europe in control of the project at the moment.  The fact that
> the number of users lost is in the same ballpark while the amount of
> data lost is significantly higher in our part of the world, seems to
> show the regions and the users whos interests they are looking out for.
>> > - Once a contributor has Accepted/Declined the new terms, they may
>> > continue editting normally.  Even if they decline, they may continue
>> > editting normally until and if Phase 4 kicks in.
> Maybe I missed the announcement, but is there now an option to record
> that you decline the licence?


Supposedly it sends you to this flippant page if you decline the CT:

"If you have reached this page because you declined the OpenStreetMap
contributor terms, that's too bad.
We're sorry that you have decided to not accept the OpenStreetMap
Contributor Terms. That means that you can not contribute data to

It would have been good for the dust to settle on CT acceptance by
data owners before moving to Phase 3:
Are they compliant with the spirit and letter of CC-BY 2.5/3.0
Attribution AU? (then the Australian Government data issue is solved?)
If not why not; are data owners giving up something that they
previously had and intended when they licensed their data?
Is it just about the level of attribution? That would be a lot easier
to get clarified than trying to get a whole new suite of licences
What happened to NearMap?

More information about the Talk-au mailing list