'Fish and Visitors all smell after three days'
It looks like the end of the OSM path for me.
I retain copyright over all my work and will merely check back to ensure that anything I have contributed is not included in any ODbL licensed map.
OpenStreetMap 開放街圖
'Fish and Visitors all smell after three days'
It looks like the end of the OSM path for me.
I retain copyright over all my work and will merely check back to ensure that anything I have contributed is not included in any ODbL licensed map.
討論
由 Rovastar 於 2011年04月12日 23時21分 發表的評論
I have never entered the OBDL debate so could you summarise why you don't want to do that.
Also If someone edits your data then I presume it is then becomes *their* work. That is the way it seem to me when I edit others ways (tweaking the road layout, etc). Is that the case? and what are you going to do with that.
由 JoshD 於 2011年04月13日 02時04分 發表的評論
Things are still somewhat unclear, but it appears that all edits after a non-odbl edit will be deleted. So if one user who doesn't accept the new terms created a ton of objects, then hundreds of others further edit and refine the data, it will all be erased, as it considered "tainted". This is on the wiki somewhere, but I can't find it right now.
由 Rovastar 於 2011年04月13日 05時18分 發表的評論
So after a year or so of planning this the situation is unclear. Great, way to go OSM. So really I should be deleting all ways I see and recreating them. I often edit existing ones.
So half or so of all objects in the database will be deleted? Great......
由 HannesHH 於 2011年04月13日 06時49分 發表的評論
Good bye and live a happy closed-minded live. :-(
由 Zverik 於 2011年04月13日 06時55分 發表的評論
We will weep for your edits, for they cannot ever be replaced.
由 Roman Fischer 於 2011年04月13日 07時57分 發表的評論
This statement makes me very sad.
I cannot imagine how one can get so frustrated over a mere license debate...
-Roman
由 Sanderd17 於 2011年04月13日 10時38分 發表的評論
If they are going to delete all non-ODBL data, I am sure that there will be a fork of OSM.
Off coarse it's not optimal, a fork is never good, but that way we will see what users think is the best. And if OSM can survive as is, this or its fork will also survive.
For the record: I have agreed to the new terms (I don't really care about the license) but I don't know if it's a goog idea to switch.
由 wieland 於 2011年04月13日 16時27分 發表的評論
Why do you want to come back to check "that anything you have contributed is not included in any ODbL licensed map"?
Why don't you start now and remove all your edits and all objects that you have created? But please don't remove other objects.
Shall I help you? E.g. removing osm.org/browse/way/61458863 which has only one version by you?
由 Sanderd17 於 2011年04月13日 17時29分 發表的評論
@wieland: removing things will not help, it will make the work harder for a possible fork.
This just popped in my mind: if the license is that important, why not allow different licenses in the database? If an OSM'er only agrees to CC-BY-SA or to ODBL, he can only edit a node/way/relation that already has those license, if he agrees to both, a new way is licensed under both licences until another user edits it (then it becomes the license that user has agreed to).
A user of the data could choose:
* only use CC-BY-SA data and comply to that license
* only use ODBL data and comply to that license
* use all OSM data and comply to both licenses
From a technical point of view, this causes some overhead (but all the ODBL tests they do now also cause overhead) and I think it is possible from a legal point of view.
由 wieland 於 2011年04月13日 17時53分 發表的評論
@Sanderd17: but this will result in a war to get as many objects as possible under somebodys favorite licence. I think it is not worth the extra work.
And for a fork it is not so difficult to get all objects deleted by drlizau after some date. Just look at http://planet.openstreetmap.org/changesets-110406.osm.bz2 it's just 278M compressed osm-data. In this case I should not help him :-)
由 netman55 於 2011年04月13日 23時27分 發表的評論
I have to agree with drlizau. This whole issue is a complete mess, communication about the new regime has been jumbled, disjointed and scattered all over place with out of date info and broken links. According to some minutes buried somewhere all non-odbl edits were to stop at the end of March, but this was not made clear at all and never happened which goes to show what a complete un-transparent shambles this licence/terms of use change really is
由 ToeBee 於 2011年04月14日 05時12分 發表的評論
I won't disagree with those saying the license change process seems messy. But like Sanderd17, I just don't care enough about licenses to say no. I like the concept of share-alike and I think attribution is more than fair to ask for from consumers of our data but honestly, I think I would continue contributing if we were going public domain too. All the debate about licensing, copyright assignment, etc makes me go "meh"
由 chriscf 於 2011年04月14日 21時17分 發表的評論
Bye Liz. Mind the door as you leave.
What do you know, the sky didn't fall down after all ...
由 richie0815 於 2011年04月18日 08時41分 發表的評論
I don´t understand the whole license issue...
Didn´t we all start with osm to contribute data with no limitations to the community?
Why now claim contributed data as "personal", retain copyrights and the deletion of data?
由 netman55 於 2011年04月18日 15時57分 發表的評論
From my viewpoint, having to agree to grant worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable licence to my data, which I don't mind sharing with the community, to a limited company is a big NO-NO
由 Vclaw 於 2011年04月19日 12時56分 發表的評論
Goodbye.
Though if you are leaving OSM, why are you still trolling the mailing lists?