Foundation/AGM2022/Election to Board/Answers and manifestos/Q11 OSMF and HOT (Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team)

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

OSMF ... and HOT (Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team)

  • Do you have any thoughts on our relationship with HOT?
  • At the board level, how would you handle any perceived conflict of interest between the two organisations, particularly as regards protection of the name "OpenStreetMap"?

Daniela Waltersdorfer J. - Q11 OSMF ... and HOT (Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team)

I believe HOT is doing tremendous good work globally. I'm not quite sure of what issues pertaining to conflict of interest exist. In regards to protection of the name, I would say if they [HOT] utilize the OSM name in a manner that is offensive, promotes hate, or negative actions, then steps should be taken to discuss this. I have not heard of anything like that though. I think the same steps [whatever they may be] should be taken if the OSMF does anything to harm the protection of the name OpenStreetMap, seeing especially how according to the Strategic Plan, "The OpenStreetMap Foundation (OSMF) supports but does not control the OpenStreetMap (OSM) project."

Arnalie Vicario - Q11 OSMF ... and HOT (Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team)

Short answer: The MoU / discussion regarding the use of the Openstreetmap trademark by HOT has been on the board agenda for quite some time so I think it’s about time to finalize it.

Longer answer: I believe that the fundamental goals and aims of HOT are compatible with those of OSM and the OSMF. However, there are obvious points of contention and conflict of interest. I will not be representing HOT as a (board) member of the OSMF, I will be representing my own views and those of my community. Where there is potential for real or perceived conflict of interest between my employment at HOT and my role as an OSMF board member, I will practice transparency, consult with others, and recuse myself from discussing and voting where appropriate.

Włodzimierz Bartczak - Q11 OSMF ... and HOT (Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team)

I have great respect for HOT associated editors. I have helped to map their projects a few times (I am currently focusing on the UN Mappers task). However, this does not change the fact that I consider their actions vis-à-vis OSMF as controversial and requiring regulation. The participation of their representatives in the OSMF board elections shows how much we need to regulate our relationship with each other. Starting with the use of OSM's name and contributions to the financing of OSM's infrastructure.

Ariel Kadouri - Q11 OSMF ... and HOT (Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team)

Humanitarian OpenStreetMap is an incredible organization promoting OpenStreetMap by building tools, supporting many individuals and students, and making a substantial an impact across many social and environmental issues using OpenStreetMap. There is ongoing contractual discussions onto the use of the name. As a result of the talk thread, [[1]] was linked the bottom of each page on their website. As these discussions continue in good faith, I see no reason to disrupt them.

Victor N.Sunday - Q11 OSMF ... and HOT (Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team)

Christian Shadrack - Q11 OSMF ... and HOT (Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team)

More collaboration and continuity in discussions is the key to success

Sarah Hoffmann - Q11 OSMF ... and HOT (Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team)

We already have a number of policies in place that lay out the position of the OSMF (and hopefully of the OSM community) what we expect from relations between OSM(F) and large organisations. I don't see any conflict of interest here, just an interest by the OSM(F) to have a healthy relationship.

Logan McGovern - Q11 OSMF ... and HOT (Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team)

This is an issue that needs to be resolved, and I have faith that it will be eventually. Companies are bureaucracies too, and bureaucracies are slow to act. I don't believe HOT has any malicious intentions, and an accord will be made with HOT being allowed to emphasize their close relationship and unique role with OSM.

Arun Ganesh - Q11 OSMF ... and HOT (Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team)

Admittedly, there seems to be a lot of prior work on the topic which would require a detailed reading to give an informed response. For now, my simple approach says that HOT should be treated like any other organisation using OSM in its name and the trademark agreement framed for HOT should also apply to any future organisations without bias.

Mateusz Konieczny - Q11 OSMF ... and HOT (Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team)

Hot in general

HOT is a project with a very promising and interesting idea that can significantly help, and in many cases they were helpful.

But it is also causing problems - there is a reason why "HOT-quality mapping" would be recognised as an insult, not as praise.

In large part, it is caused by a focus on quantity, not on quality. Note how their own website shows their focus "137,156,379 Buildings Mapped" and similar statistics ignoring that badly mapped buildings are worse than no data at all.

I am worried that in some areas potential local communities are discouraged from even forming. People were recruited, and told to map remotely. Sometimes they were supposed to map buildings using imagery of quality making mapping impossible even for experienced contributors.

Then geometry count was added to various statistics, proudly mentioned in the next round of funding applications, while actual data quality got worse.

After all, blank space is more encouraging than an area where someone added shapes tagged as buildings unrelated to actual buildings on the ground. With various name=* tags using English rather than the local language.

This kind of colonization is happening among the worst cases of organised mapping, but it sometimes happens.

It is a good thing to recognise that there can be a conflict of interest between HOT and OpenStreetMap.

A large part of problems can be resolved by HOT by focusing more on the quality of data and deemphasing the volume of data.

And focusing more on better documentation, training and retaining contributors and reviewing all edits made as part of organised editing.

Trademarks

Ideally, HOT would use a name that does not suggest exclusivity on the topic of humanitarian use of OpenStreetMap. And they definitely must follow rules, for example having this notice on their website that as of 2022-11-13 seems missing as far as I can see from looking at https://www.hotosm.org/ .

Craig Allan - Q11 OSMF ... and HOT (Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team)

Do you have any thoughts on our relationship with HOT? At the board level, how would you handle any perceived conflict of interest between the two organisations, particularly as regards protection of the name "OpenStreetMap"?

HOT is a well organised, well resourced organisation contributing a lot of data to the OSM database and doing a lot of good in the world. It is part of the mapping community that we all serve. Our relationship should be cordial, mutually respectful and supportive.

Handling conflicts of interest at Board level

Speaking generally, a conflict of interest happens if one or more OSMF Board members promotes, or is perceived to promote, a personal or an external (third party) position on any topic whatsoever. The OSMF Board members are bound by British law to owe a fiduciary duty to OSMF. This means that they MUST be LOYAL and act SOLELY in the best interests of OSMF. Directors have to leave self-interest and all other affiliations and loyalties outside the Boardroom door. Failure to comply can have civil and criminal legal consequences.

If conflict, or even the appearance of conflict arises, the OSMF rules require that the conflicted member should declare that conflict and then should then leave the meeting.

Trademark or Brandname Protection

With regard to protection of the brand "OpenStreetMap" I suggest licensing exactly as is done for Local Chapters. Any thematic mapping organisation (including HOT) could apply for Thematic Local Chapter status and if successful would be granted use of the brand subject to the usual conditions.

As above, any conflicted Board member can't participate in any discussion or decisions on LC status.


OSM Foundation's board election 2022: official questions

All board candidates' manifestos

2022 OpenStreetMap Foundation's: Board election - Voting information and instructions - Annual General Meeting

v · d · e
Annual General Meetings of the OpenStreetMap Foundation
Board Elections
Retrieved from "https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Foundation/AGM2022/Election_to_Board/Answers_and_manifestos/Q11_OSMF_and_HOT_(Humanitarian_OpenStreetMap_Team)&oldid=2445077"