OpenStreetMap
Way back in 2015 I wrote this diary post Is OSM business unfriendly? on how core OSM limiting itself to data collection had fostered a bustling ecosystem.
Organisations from small to large, commercial and non-commercial have built their businesses on building OSM know-how, normalizing the data, aggregating it with other sources, and providing services on top of it. It is one of the major factors that has made OSM not just a hobby project, but a notable player on the global stage.
Yes, the Linux Foundations OMF is disruptive, but the disruption is mainly in that it will remove a major part of the raison d’être for these organisation in the wider OSMspace.
The surprising bit at SOTM-EU over the weekend was just how hilariously unaware both Linux Foundation members and representatives were that their main effect will be stomping out a whole raft of SMEs, and the sudden realisation by the victims that US big tech and their non-profit front are not their friends.
What does this mean for core OSM?
I’ve argued that we should be moving the boundary of what we do outwards so that we can at least provide more of what was provided by the layer of service providers. Not all of the market for geo data and services outside of the US tech bubble is going to enthusiastically embrace that their choice of suppliers has been reduced to a duopoly. But I will concede that doing nothing and letting the market forces play out is the more OSMish reaction.
PS: I would point out that all of the above has already chewed though multiple times in public. Maybe if the Linux Foundation doesn’t want to be put on the spot and look very very out of touch they should read what other people are saying about them.
Discussion
Comment from Zverik on 15 November 2023 at 14:51
Well yes, and also I don’t care :) True, there have been many businesses for packaging the OSM data. Some of which will be disrupted. But very few of those, if any at all (Geofabrik?), made tools that affect mappers.
So if you read OSM as the community of mappers and an ecosystem of data collection, ingestion, and validation tools, then nothing would change with Overture. It was volunteer before and stays hobbyist after.
Comment from SimonPoole on 15 November 2023 at 15:33
Sure -you- don’t care, but lets just take the example of government organisations, up to now they had a multitude of options to acquire services outside of google from OSM based companies.
In the future they will just have the choice between the goog and an organisation controlled by Facebook, Microsoft and Amazon.
Comment from CjMalone on 15 November 2023 at 21:09
This is just a side affect though. They don’t care about small businesses either. This about the ODbL, they don’t want more copy left data. They don’t want OSM interacting with governments and businesses convincing them to release release copy left data.
Comment from Zverik on 16 November 2023 at 14:52
I’d say the major part of this disruption you’re commenting about came with Rapid, not Overture. Rapid is (and has been) the bigger threat.
Comment from das-g on 16 November 2023 at 21:30
Do any governments actually publish data under ODbL? Up to now (unless they were maintaining data directly within OSM), I’ve only seen them publish data licensed in ways that allow OSM to relicense / redistribute said data under ODbL, if compatibility with OSM was taken into account at all.
Comment from CjMalone on 16 November 2023 at 23:30
ZTM Warszawa used it for public transit data, it seems they no longer do? Derived from OSM?
Department of Transport and Planning, VIC, AU wanted to, but it seems they were talked out if it?
TfL use if for routing APIs (OSM data), but have actively contributed to OSM in the past. There are plenty more if we talk about creating/OSM first data including National Trust.
But I think it’s more about the future, OSM has won on roads. The worlds road network is ODbL. Lets win on everything.
Comment from courtiney on 17 November 2023 at 12:13
you wrote, “I’ve argued that we should be moving the boundary of what we do outwards so that we can at least provide more of what was provided by the layer of service providers. Not all of the market for geo data and services outside of the US tech bubble is going to enthusiastically embrace that their choice of suppliers has been reduced to a duopoly. “
We should do this. We should not just let the market forces play out. It’s that simple. It is eminently doable. We could change our passive ways. We should change them. I might say we owe it to the project and to the world.
Comment from courtiney on 17 November 2023 at 12:14
you wrote, “I’ve argued that we should be moving the boundary of what we do outwards so that we can at least provide more of what was provided by the layer of service providers. Not all of the market for geo data and services outside of the US tech bubble is going to enthusiastically embrace that their choice of suppliers has been reduced to a duopoly. “
We should do this. We should not just let the market forces play out. It’s that simple. It is eminently doable. We could change our passive ways. We should change them. I might say we owe it to the project and to the world.
Comment from cbeddow on 20 November 2023 at 16:18
Currently the only I disruptions I see are:
I don’t argue for any particularly noble cause here, but it will serve a purpose and has a net positive for those it impacts, and others who see it as negative, I don’t think it really impacts unless they are operating a business that seeks to make revenue doing something Overture provides for free, perhaps.
Comment from Jane Elodie on 21 November 2023 at 09:07
If Overture negotiates datasets to be released under Open licenses, it is objectively good for the world. If the worlds geo data ends up under a “permissive” license, not a “copy left” license, it’s subjectively bad for the world.
OSM has has won as the base map. But Overture is abstracting us away, for a future where there is permissive data of the worlds road network. We are a last resort source for Overture. Overture hates the “copy left”.
Christopher, can you or else anyone involved with Overture say honestly: if there is a permissive source, Overture will continue to use OSM?
Comment from cbeddow on 22 November 2023 at 08:11
I am not sure I understand when you claim Overture hates copy left? This is your view, and does not represent anyone. I love OSM (dearly) and have worked on some pieces of Overture. I don’t have hate, and I don’t know anyone else who does. Please don’t create chimeras out of people. This just shows again the disruption in point #1: emotional reactions to Overture, regardless of the technical or practical aspects.
If Overtue hates copy left, then it would seem fair to say that in inverse, OSM hates being totally free and open (permissive). But is that really true?
If there are 15 data sources, OSM still remains a good one: sources are worth comparing. Permissive ve is far easier to mix with other data, ODBl has all kinds of things that need caution, you can read the OSM Wiki on this.
All the permissive data is excellent for OSM: it becomes available to go into OSM. Daylight is important to Overture. Overture alles others to choose which data they use, no reason to abandon OSM.
Comment from InfosReseaux on 26 November 2023 at 16:02
Despite such a question may be naive, it deserves to be asked here: in case the effects that had been feared many times here are currently real, what had we (or the victims) done as a community to prevent that?
We should face our own confusion between frugality and being stuck in a lack of tools to manage our own data prior to criticize too quickly some challengers that arise. Let’s focus on challenges to tackle instead of crying about disruption we could be part of, again.