[OSM-talk] We need to have a conversation about attribution
frederik at remote.org
Fri Mar 1 07:52:43 UTC 2019
what I write below is my own opinion and not that of the OSMF board,
just as Mikel's opinion is his own and not that of the OSMF board.
On 01.03.19 02:51, Mikel Maron wrote:
> These are norms not rules. ODbL doesn't specify how attribution needs to
> happen, or anything about equivalence with other attribution. So even if
> OSMF were to take on enforcement, there's nothing to specific to
> enforce. (And I recommend we drop the whole license shaming shenanigans
> -- we should accept that OSM has won and we are not the underdogs any
> more. )
You make three points here, one that there's no rules we could enforce,
and then you say even if we could shame people into adhering to rules
that we cannot enforce, we shouldn't do that either, and that the reason
for this largesse was that "we have won".
I disagree in all three points.
1. I think that we can set up rules - not mere "recommendations" - that
we can enforce.
2. I think that we should shame people into following our rules if they
don't do it voluntarily.
3. I think that we should be firm in asserting our place in the geo data
world, and as long as other players in the field use intellectual
property regulations to their advantage, we should too. As long as
Google only give you their maps if you in turn acquiesce to being
tracked, so should we only give people our maps if they are willing to
follow our rules. This has nothing to do with "having won".
> We may not like that reality, but that's the underlying legal situation.
Frankly, I wouldn't believe you even if you were a lawyer. But you aren't!
> We can certainly recommend a better way. And that recommendation can
> only be formulated through the OSMF
We would have to find a way to exclude corporate interests from
formulating that recommendation though, or we'd be like a supermarket
that lets its customers set the price. I.e. no board members or working
group members working for any business affected by a decision should
participate, and neither should the "advisory board" on which corporate
interests are represented.
The fact that the resulting sub-group of the OSMF would be quite small
is food for thought!
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frederik at remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
More information about the talk