[OSM-talk] What could we do to make this licences discussion more inclusive?

[SteveC]

On Jul 18, 2010, at 7:46 PM, John Smith wrote:

> On 19 July 2010 03:36, SteveC <steve at asklater.com> wrote:
>> Why? Because the project is growing very fast and attracting more data all the time. If Google or Nearmap don't want to play ball that's fine - just look at the hundreds of other companies and organisations that do, like Bing and MapQuest's announcements at SOTM for example.
> 
> Nearmap isn't dictating any terms, other than you can only use their
> data under a share alike license so no need to lump them in with
> Google. However I have a fairly good idea how much information has
> been added in regional areas that wouldn't exist otherwise.
> 
>> I agree it might be bad in the short term that we lose some aerial imagery (but I posit that would only happen because you give nearmap the impression that the community will do whatever they say, if you ask them to join us from the position that this is the direction we're going, I posit they would be more positive). But in the longer term I guarantee we'll have lots of other sources of data and imagery. It will be a temporary setback, even if it happens.
> 
> You go on and on about how if 50% disappear wait a short time and
> it'll magically appear within a short period of time,

Could you point to where I go on and on about it? I'm aware of only mentioning it once, in the above email?

> I call BS, if
> the tiger data was dumped from OSM how long exactly would it take to
> regather it? How demoralising would it be on the people that fixed up
> the tiger data? Combined with people that don't respond or don't agree
> it would set the Aussie community back to the stone age effectively,
> and it will actively turn away new contributors because they won't
> want the same thing to happen to their efforts.

John, you're painting a dystopian view based on a couple of key things - that 1) nearmap would never change their mind and 2) the 'same thing' could happen at any point.

1) I think their mind could be changed, maybe by giving them a more positive view on the process that led to this license, the people behind it and so on. Perhaps they have been given a dystopian view of the license?

2) I don't think anyone wants to start relicensing any time soon after the odbl gets implemented or rejected. I think everyone would want a holiday.

And anyway, you're comparing it to an absolute situation of status quo - that we all just hum along on CCBYSA because nearmap won't work with us. We can't do that. We all (well nearly all) know that CCBYSA just doesn't work, so you're saying no to the ODbL, no to PD too (because nearmap wont like that either as its not SA)... You can't go through life being a big bag of 'no' like this because nothing will ever happen. The LWG is trying to make a bunch of reasonable decisions that will inevitably disenfranchise some people. They are trying to minimise the number of people disenfranchised and the amount of it, and if you just say 'no' to everything you just look like an unreasonable extremist and risk nobody spending time on your otherwise reasonable points.

Steve

stevecoast.com