Overture is a data-centric map project, not a community of individual map editors. Therefore, Overture is intended to be complementary to OSM. We combine OSM with other sources to produce new open map data sets. Overture data will be available for use by the OpenStreetMap community under compatible open data licenses. Overture members are encouraged to contribute to OSM directly.
I don’t know a lot about any of both projects, but it seems fair.
All companies are forced to play nice when they aren’t at the top. Google has a monopoly on mapping, their only real competitor is TomTom, and really only in the US. All of these companies need mapping data and don’t want to pay google for it, so it makes sense to work together to release this.
While this is not bad, didn’t these companies considered just contributing to OpenStreetMap? Why is starting a new thing better?
It seems their consider themselves complimentary with OpenStreetMap, as stated on their FAQ https://overturemaps.org/resources/faq/#
I don’t know a lot about any of both projects, but it seems fair.
Almost sounds too fair, like there’s a catch. You can never know with these guys.
All companies are forced to play nice when they aren’t at the top. Google has a monopoly on mapping, their only real competitor is TomTom, and really only in the US. All of these companies need mapping data and don’t want to pay google for it, so it makes sense to work together to release this.
Good question. Contributing to OSM seems like the better route. Pun intended.
This does use OpenStreetMap. It adds other public data from other sources.
Out of the four layers Overture Maps provides, th ey use OpenStreetMap for the Transportation and Building layers.
Can’t collect data on users without starting their own thing.
That wouldn’t be evil. And they probably can’t just take over OSM or one would have already.