OpenStreetMap
Corrected Bing & OS streetview injected errors for this area. A lot still to do in this area as named residential walkways are missing. Just got to know this part of the world very well as I am there every day at the moment, but fast losing interest in OSM to be bothered to update fully due to the fact I'll be locked out soon due the stupid new CT's IMO
Discussion
Comment from chriscf on 2 May 2011 at 04:53
What's your objection?
Can't be that the process is rushed - it's been in train for some 3-4 years, depending on when you consider it "started".
Can't be that the process is closed - it's all been done in the open via mailing lists, IRC and open conference calls that have been fully minuted.
Can't be that the process is undemocratic - it was put to an open vote, and passed with a landslide. (Just like in a real election, those that didn't bother to register have no standing to complain about the outcome.)
Can't be that it's being railroaded - the process is being led by the community, albeit through the guise of a limited company.[1] (Entirely necessary, since we can't enforce any licence unless we exist in some legal form.)
Can't be any kind of objection to OSMF - membership is open to all, and there are no restrictions on election to the board other than those imposed by law (we can't have under-18s, amongst others).
Can't be that it's taking rights away from you - they explicitly say "grant", not "transfer".
Can't be that it's handing rights to an opaque, unaccountable company - the only one of those that's remotely involved is Microsoft (*snark*).
Can't be anything to do with the OS, since there's nothing in their licence that prevents you from releasing everything else.
So, ... what did I miss?
Comment from netman55 on 3 May 2011 at 10:14
>> Can't be that the process is undemocratic - it was put to an open vote, and passed with a landslide <<
erm.. what open vote? I wasn't invited to register to vote, where's the result? I for one would be interested to know the outcome of poll of 300k+ contributors.
You missed:
"You hereby grant to OSMF a worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable licence to do any act that is restricted by copyright, database right or any related right over anything within the Contents, whether in the original medium or any other. These rights explicitly include commercial use, and do not exclude any field of endeavour. These rights include, without limitation, the right to sub-license the work through multiple tiers of sub-licensees and to sue for any copyright violation directly connected with OSMF's rights under these terms. To the extent allowable under applicable local laws and copyright conventions, You also waive and/or agree not to assert against OSMF or its licensees any moral rights that You may have in the Contents."
Which in effect gives OSMF shared ownership of the data contributors make
Comment from seav on 3 May 2011 at 14:30
So you're saying that you will never support the Free Software Foundation (FSF) and the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) as well, two of the most admired open-source projects in the world?
The ASF forces on all its code contributors the following similar language in their contributor license agreement: "You hereby grant to the [Apache Software] Foundation and to recipients of software distributed by the Foundation a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable copyright license to reproduce, prepare derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute Your Contributions and such derivative works."
In the FSF's case, you don't just share rights, you transfer all your copyright to the code to FSF.
Comment from chriscf on 4 May 2011 at 20:54
This one. Remember that the Foundation is not some shadowy cabal - its membership is (and was) open to all, and people were welcome to join and vote during the window. That to me is no more onerous than having to register to vote in real life.
Comment from netman55 on 10 May 2011 at 11:19
So it still was not an open vote to the majority of contributors (300K+) but to a relatively small group of, in effect self appointed, people. I don't call that "Open" but limited to people who can afford to pay the membership fee every year.
Remember in some parts of the world ( the very areas where active mapping should encouraged ) £15 could easy equate to a substantial part or not all a persons annual earnings