[OSM-legal-talk] Attempt to clarify

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

> I might therefore conclude (and stop me if my logic is faulty) that the 
> only reason for someone to propose Option 1 over Option 2 on the basis 
> of "it won't work" is because they actually have a principled objection 
> to the share-alike part of Option 2, and are using "it won't work" as an 
> excuse.

Well. Option 1 would be a honest PD. Option 2a would be a "well we
wanted something else and we got this" PD. Sounds like losing face to
me.

(long time readers of legal-talk just stop here, the following is
well-known to you.)

But personally, I *do* have a principled objection to share-alike. I
think it is the choice of the petty-minded, of people who can't let
go, who praise themselves as giving something away when in fact
they're just laying out a bait; people who really want to control and
enforce and sue and compel; people who would not hesitate one second
to employ DRM and stuff if it could be used to further their goals. I
personally view this as following in the tracks of RIAA & other
industry bad-asses, just with another agenda, and it is worlds away
from "free" or "liberty". Share-Alike is about control and compliance,
not about freedom and liberty.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00.09' E008°23.33'