[OSM-talk] open data

[rob at robmyers.org]

Quoting Etienne <80n80n at gmail.com>:

> If we don't get any consumers then there will be no modifications to hand
> back, so we are cutting off our noses to spite our faces.

OSM is a young and very successful project. There is no need currently 
to worry
about user demographics. Linux started as a student project and as an end user
I wouldn't have wanted to use it for the first couple of years, but 
that didn't
stop people getting value from it and contributing to it in that time.

> Its also very obvious now that contributors and consumers are really two
> very different types of user.  Most contributors are wizzing around the
> countryside on bicycles with GPS units and cameras - and they seem to find
> this a very enjoyable activity in its own right.  most consumers of the data
> are going to be small companies, associations, groups and individuals who
> cannot afford commercial map license fees but have no time or interest in
> making maps (there's a gap between contributor and consumer where some
> people might be able to make some money).

OSM is a public good, like Wikipedia, archive.org or GNU. If small 
companies can
use it that's great. BY-SA doesn't prevent them from doing so.

I'm happy to assist any business model discussions. I've practical 
experience of
this including helping a big television broadcaster in the UK.

> Since collecting the data and making the base maps is so much fun there is
> clearly no need to drive OSM by contributions back from consumers.  Its
> doing very well without them.

Every little helps, and OSM will need consumer contributions for 
obscure areas.
And OSM should not put off regular contributors by turning them into free
labour. H2G2 failed where Wikipedia succeeded in part because of the way it
tried to exploit its users contributions commercially.

> There is also evidence that map publishers faced with a choice between using
> OSM data under the current license and not producing a map at all, will
> alway choose the latter option.

It took Novell and IBM a while to adopt Linux, which uses a similar 
licence. I'm
sure if you'd asked them a decade ago their opinion would have been similar.
This just means that we have some work to do finding early adopters to
demonstrate the advantages of using OSM data.

> There does not appear to be a good case for continuing to use the SA
> license.

The case for keeping SA is that it is the best way of growing and 
protecting the
value of the project for the widest possible range of users. This includes
business users and potential users who currently don't understand how they can
benefit from or contribute to OSM.

- Rob.