[OSM-talk] Fork OSM to a CCBYSA 2.0 continuation : A solution proposal
vegard at engen.priv.no
vegard at engen.priv.no
Tue Aug 24 07:21:33 BST 2010
Well. Then I come along, add an amenity=cafe, under a CCBYSA2.0-license. But
at the wrong spot. And you, having chosen an OdBL-license, decides to move it
to the correct position. Under what license is that node?
This isn't going to be easy, hardly possible? :)
- Vegard
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 07:58:22AM +0200, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote:
> A fork as stipulated is not necessarily about a group of people leaving OSM , but about
>
> we (OSM) deciding to continue in two or more future directions
>
> covered by different licenses, and maybe finally decide which license fits best.
>
>
>
> This would require the OSM database to include a extra field for each and every item indicating the license
>
> the data was provided by its contributor. The license choice can be made in the users profile.
>
>
>
> For most of OSM there is no difference.
>
> The license is only relevant once data is extracted to external parties.
>
>
>
> External parties will therefore always know under what license any node and any way of the
>
> database had been granted to them.
>
>
>
> The map server and most applications at would remain as they are.
>
>
>
> We may however create a second and or more maps showing only the data from specific licenses
>
> and enabling OSM-ers to evaluate the consequences of their choices.
>
>
>
> I think this is the only way to solve this everlasting and destructive license discussion.
>
>
>
> It requires however, some flexibility of mind, and the trust that OSM will not
>
> abuse the choice made by its contributors. As the database and the license field will
>
> be visible to all of us, I trust that will be not a major problem.
>
>
>
>
>
> Gert Gremmen
>
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> Openstreetmap.nl (alias: cetest)
>
> P Before printing, think about the environment.
>
>
>
>
>
> Van: talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org] Namens 80n
> Verzonden: Monday, August 23, 2010 5:17 PM
> Aan: mk at koppenhoefer.com
> CC: talk at openstreetmap.org
> Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] Let's prepare to Fork OSM to a CCBYSA 2.0continuation
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 3:21 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 2010/8/23 Michael Kugelmann <MichaelK_OSM at gmx.de>:
>
> > BTW: @Felix Hartmann
> > using words like
> >>
> >> so fuck off.
> >
> > shows that you don't have arguments. So step back - defamation is alsways a
> > sign of weakness. Learn a good conduct before you continues with the
> > discussion.
>
>
>
> to be fair: he didn't write (others) should f**k off, what he meant
> was "clearly state this somewhere and tell everyone else to fuck off".
> Thus I agree that this might not be adequate language, you shouldn't
> critisize him for that, probably he wasn't aware because English is
> not his primary language.
>
> On the argument I agree though: make your own mailing lists for your
> fork. It's probably OK to announce it here (with an URL where to go,
> which was actually missing in your announcement), but further
> discussions should then be brought to the place of your fork, not
> inside the resources of OSM.
>
> I also agree it would be absurd to have OSM handle over the account
> data of its contributors (and is against almost any privacy law at
> least in Europe). There is also no logics in that: people who want to
> can simply create a new account with their old credentials on the fork
> site (I'm not planning to join the fork, but if I was I surely
> wouldn't use the same pw I used for OSM).
>
> There is absolutely no need for OSM to relinquish any private account data. No fork will ever need that data and I doubt that any fork would even bother asking OSM for it.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
--
- Vegard Engen, member of the first RFC1149 implementation team.
More information about the talk
mailing list