[OSM-talk] HOT using the OpenStreetMap-Foundation trademark

[stevea]

Yeah, what Simon says here, +1.  For most of this project's (OSM's) existence, I have understood a (fragile?) existence between what is meant by OSMF and HOT, where the former is "it" and the latter "derives from it."

I acceded to OSMF when I joined in 2009.  I didn't ever accede to HOT (not deliberately), although I have had delightful relations with people who say they represent this organization (to better map fires, earthquake disasters...etc. in my country) and other countries around the world; I consider these "good works" which intersect with my mapping interests as a contributor to the OSM project.

While these are two different activities, which relate to one another, if I am pressed to describe an organization to which I am "more beholden to," it would be OSMF, although I do not want to "crowd out" HOT, as they do "good work," although I recognize that as derivative to OSM.

These "tracks" can get along with one another, I'm not sure what over or where is the "current tiff," but there is far, far more in common than there is different.

This is solvable.

> On May 15, 2022, at 12:41 AM, Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch> wrote:
> Amanda
> 
> I think you are creating the unfortunate impression here that protecting the OpenStreetMap communities intellectual property is optional for the OSMF.
> 
> It isn't.
> 
> One of the main reasons the foundation was created in the first place was to provide a body that could formally hold such rights. That early OSMF didn't do a particularly good job of it and that we continue to suffer from multiple early blunders, including the one that is the subject of this thread, doesn't make that responsibility go away.
> 
> The OSMFs trademark policy clearly delineates which uses by the community are permissible without a specific licence and all other uses require permission, particularly when used in trade and commerce which is clearly the case with HOT.
> 
> Simon
<remainder redacted for brevity>