[OSM-talk] About my stubbornness

[Nick Black]

On 7/24/06, Benjamin Kellermann <Benjamin.Kellermann at gmx.de> wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 23.07.2006, 14:51 +0200 schrieb Wollschaf:
> > On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 14:12:47 +0200, Immanuel Scholz wrote:
> > >- the data should be free accessible for all time
> >
> > It should be possible to fork a project on the base of OSM, which it
> > is, IMHO.
>
> Do you really think this would be possible without a database
> representation?
> Maybe it would be, but with a much more trouble.
>
> > Essential decisions (Licensing etc.) have to be made by the community.
> >
> > > - anonymity is good
> >
> > Correct. I dont' see why you need an anonymous account for that. People
> > wishing to stay anonymous will not use their real email address for
> > signing up, nor any relevant password.
>
> Much people do not wish to stay anonymous, they just want not to
> register! This is not a discussion for people who surf through
> anon-proxy or onion-routing and delete their cookies and browser cache
> every 2 Mitutes. It is a thing of simplicity. We loose much manpower if
> we forbid anonymity and gain nothing.
> The seemingly advantage of separating "good" people which do not upload
> copyrighted data from "bad" ones can achieved in a similar way by
> logging ip addresses.
>
> > Iit would be a complete hassle to find out what one account that made
> > thousands of changes to the datasatet actually did (with malicious
> > intent), and revert those changes without losing other valuable data.
>
> You do not get people who has malicious intent. You can create hundred
> different accounts and upload ten changes per account (to a different
> time through a different proxy).
>
> > It would be an anonymity breach to give out all login details.
>
> One more reason to log everything ip-address based.
> BTW: nobody wants to give out every login detail, for ex. passwd is not
> necessary...

I dont see how IP logging would provide an adequate level of
protection against copywright violation.  Most people do not have a
static IP address and as OSM moves out of the expert domain, this
proportion will become increasingly significant.      Again, we need
to know the actual legal argument here - not our differing
conjectures.  Maybe deleting all contributions from a particular IP
address would be sufficient to appease the Courts, but in the current
climate in Britain, I dont think it would be.  The prosecution would
have a very strong argument that an IP address is not representative
of an idividual and that deleting the contributions of one IP address
does not equal due diligence.

The flip side of this is that Wikipedia manages fine with this model.
Perhaps someone could contact some Wikipedia people and see what their
policy is based on?

Nick

>
> Bye, Ben
>
> --
> GPG-Key-ID:  491A3D9C
> Fingerprint: D19E 04A8 8895 020A 8DF6  0092 3501 1A32 491A 3D9C
> http://pgpkeys.pca.dfn.de/
>
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQBExIRzNQEaMkkaPZwRArXVAJ9s6sDHcSO6a7utd0st7PwLFBeRvgCeKtzf
> YJI7oWLeCIMGPcvU8XJb/NM=
> =ElGC
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
>
>
>