[OSM-legal-talk] Noise vs unanswered questions
rob at robmyers.org
Wed Sep 1 23:57:40 BST 2010
On 09/01/2010 10:17 PM, Liz wrote:
> 1. From where does OSMF get the mandate to choose the licence? OSMF mandate is
> to own and run the servers . I got that from the OSMF website.
The OSMF's Memorandum of Association, which is the legal expression of
the Foundation's purpose, states:
"3. The objects for which the Company is established are:
3.1 OpenStreetMap Foundation is dedicated to encouraging the growth,
development and distribution of free geospatial data and to providing
geospatial data for anybody to use and share.
4. In support of the objects, but not otherwise, the Company shall have
power to do all things incidental or conducive to the attainment of the
objects or any of them."
> 2. Why is a vote among ~300 people binding on a community of ~300,000
> contributors, of whom ~12,500 are active mappers.
If anyone believes they have a legally binding obligation to relicence
their data they are mistaken.
> 3. Why does the OSMF use the advice of a lawyer who was party to writing the
> ODbL? I see there the biggest conflict of interest in the project. Good legal
> advice is independent, and the price should not involved in determinign
> whether it is good or bad.
In my experience access to the author of a licence is a good thing.
> 4. How much data loss is acceptable to the pro-ODbL lobby?
There is no pro-ODbL "lobby". There are individuals and presumably
organizations who support relicencing (however enthusiastically or
reluctantly, and for whatever reason), but that support is not to my
knowledge organized in any way or based on any hidden agenda.
> 5. When will the tools be available to see how much data worldwide will be
> removed? - on a world map, not a diagram.
A more constructive project would be a visualisation of how long it
would take to relicence or recreate the data, and details on how to do so.
More information about the legal-talk