<div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 3:59 AM, SteveC <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:steve@asklater.com">steve@asklater.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div class="im"><div><br></div><div><br>On Dec 5, 2009, at 20:03, 80n <<a href="mailto:80n80n@gmail.com" target="_blank">80n80n@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><div></div><blockquote type="cite">
<div><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 10:55 PM, SteveC <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:steve@asklater.com" target="_blank"></a><a href="mailto:steve@asklater.com" target="_blank">steve@asklater.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div><br>
On Dec 5, 2009, at 3:52 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:<br>
> In fact, I'm pretty sure that if the LWG had made an effort to reach out to the critics and get their feedback<br>
<br>
</div>On planet Frederik where water runs uphill and cats chase dogs, there weren't three rounds of input on the license, the LWG minutes weren't open, 80n wasn't on the board and didn't see all this stuff, Matt didn't diligently respond to every concern...<br>
<br></blockquote><div>Steve<br>You will no doubt remember that the LWG didn't even record any minutes until I pushed for them do so.<br><br>You will no doubt also remember that after the LWG's proposals were presented to the board on 9th July 2009, I provided extensive feedback. There are 21 points alone noted in this document: <a href="http://docs.google.com/View?id=dd9g3qjp_0hnnw6tc9" target="_blank"></a><a href="http://docs.google.com/View?id=dd9g3qjp_0hnnw6tc9" target="_blank">http://docs.google.com/View?id=dd9g3qjp_0hnnw6tc9</a><br>
<br>I don't think you realised that OSM is much more than just a few people who hang out on the OSM talk mailing lists. There are many thousands of contributors who need to be involved in the process. It takes real hard work to reach out to them. The license change is not a simple message and so requires extraordinary effort and outreach to communicate it to the community.<br>
<br></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>Let's say you're right and the LWG is wrong, against the odds. What would you like to happen now?</div><div class="im"><br></div></div></blockquote><div>
</div><div>Nearly 200,000 people have signed up to OSM. In doing so, they all agreed to the CC BY-SA license. Whether or not the current license is good everyone, including you, signed up to it. <br><br>For better or worse, every single contributor today is happy to continue to contribute under this license. If they didn't then they would just stop contributing. <br>
<br>Hindsight is wonderful and I know you wouldn't have started the project under CC BY-SA if you could do it all again. But the project has been outrageously successful despite the license choice.<br><br>It's been three or four years since concerns were raised that the CC license wasn't really appropriate. People argued that the project was in mortal danger and that they sky could fall in at any moment. Well that still hasn't happened and it's clear that reputable organisations will and do respect the spirit of the CC license.<br>
<br>While in theory CC BY-SA might be unsuitable, in practice it is working marvellously well. OSM is working marvellously well. It's a wild success. You should be proud of that.<br><br>Traditionally with open source projects, if there is discord about policy or a proposal for disruptive change, then the normal course of action is to fork the project. The LWG should fork the project. If the ODbL is as good as they claim then contributors will quickly migrate. As they say: let the market decide.<br>
<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div class="im"><blockquote type="cite"><div><div class="gmail_quote">
<div>To think that because the LWG had feedback from one person and that this is sufficient is perhaps a little bit fanciful.<br></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>I don't know what this means.</div>
<div class="im"><br><blockquote type="cite"><div><div class="gmail_quote"><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
But on planet Earth, these things did indeed happen.<br>
<br>
Yours &c.<br>
<br>
Steve</blockquote></div><br>
</div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote></div><br>