[OSM-legal-talk] Paid services from OSM

[Simon Ward]

On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 12:17:50AM +0100, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> > It shouldn’t be about specifically contributing back to OSM.  Ivan has
> > already pointed out this fails the desert island and dissident tests
> > used as rules of thumb for the Debian Free Software Guidelines.
> 
> Could I please ask that you wait for the current licence to be  
> published - and, if necessary, lobby for it to be so - before  
> complaining that it fails DFSG, or in fact any of the other points  
> under discussion.

My responses in this thread have been in response to Peter Miller’s
clarifications for the brief brief of the requirements for the new
licence (and successive messages putting various points across).

I cannot comment on the new licence because I haven’t seen it.  I have
only the old draft to go on, but that’s a moot point because I was
commenting on the brief.

_I_ think this discussion is healthy, and will give people ideas on what
to look out for when the licence is released.

Simon
-- 
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a
simple system that works.—John Gall
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20081011/eeb8f0d0/attachment.pgp>