[OSM-talk] Accountability

[Nick Black]

On 7/24/06, Emil <emil79 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think some people here misunderstand where privacy concerns are appropriate.

The UK Freedom of Information Act requires organisations to protect
data they hold against possible future violations and breaches of
privacy, as well as present.  If people signed a waiver and gave
explicit permission for their contributions to be released publically,
that would be a different matter.  So now we have a torrent of emails
from people on the list saying they don't care about their tracks,
edits being made availabel etc.  That's great, but the nature of the
OSM license means that if one person does not give permission, all
derivatives of their contributions are subject to their non-approval.

Nick

>
> Doctor's records: there's a big privacy issue here. Same with
> insurance companies records. Etc.
>
> Now, OSM accepts _voluntary_ contributions from people. If you are at
> all interested in keeping your movements secret, why on earth are you
> recording them with a GPS and uploading them to an open project??
>
> I think we need to think about ACCOUNTABILITY. If people upload GPX
> points, I want to see who uploaded them. Not the actual names and
> addresses or anything, a pseudonym is fine - but I want to have some
> idea who to hold responsible.
>
> The way I see it is that some people have got their knickers in a
> twist about privacy and think that this trumps everything else. So I'd
> like to turn things around and focus on accountability:
>
> * Why should people expect to be able to contribute to OSM and not be
> in any way accountable for their contributions???
>
> Now, I realise some people will disagree with this. I just want to put
> my view across.
>
> Emil
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
>