[OSM-legal-talk] Process for agreeing the new licence

[Peter Miller]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: legal-talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org [mailto:legal-talk-
> bounces at openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Harley
> Sent: 28 September 2008 14:29
> To: Licensing and other legal discussions.
> Subject: [Spam] Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Process for agreeing the new licence
> 
> Peter Miller wrote:
> >> From: legal-talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org [mailto:legal-talk-
> >> bounces at openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Frederik Ramm
> 
> >> Rest seemed ok for me but then again I didn't see much participation on
> >> this list in the past months so maybe everybody's out mapping.
> >>
> > I agree that participation is low on this list, possibly main of the 191
> > subscribers to legal-talk are listening but not posting. The basic
> message
> > to these people is speak up now if you are unhappy. Please don't sit
> back
> > now and then vote against it when we are done.
> 
> One reason for just listening is that it's much easier to address
> something concrete such as a proposal, than to discuss issues in
> the abstract. But the possible proposed new license has been on
> hold for what, five or six months now? In the absence of any kind
> of update as to what's happening, I can see how people might think
> they might as well keep quiet until something happens with that.
> 
> I imagine legal issues were discussed at the OSMF AGM in August?
> Does anyone know? Are there any minutes of that or any other
> meeting? I'm an OSMF member but I've heard nothing.
>

I suggest you email one of the directors at the OSMF and ask them when they
are going to publish the draft minutes of the AGM. I would also like to read
them and I am also waiting and I have emailed them. Why is it that we can
publish a minutely update for OSM, but can't publish draft minutes for an
AGM within the month. Actually I think our big mistake was to vote for
people who liked mapping! Possibly we should take their GPS units away until
they have caught up with the paperwork :) I would also like a brief report
after each monthly directors meeting.

With regard to the licence, it has been on hold for a number of reasons, not
all good, but I believe that there is now renewed energy to get it finished
but there still seems to be a reluctance for the OSMF to say what they are
doing in public. Possibly it is because it has stoked up lots of arguments
each time it has been discussed before. Personally I don't think that is
necessary if it is approached in the right way that that is why I am doing
this.
 
> ...
> > Firstly to get a consensus on legal-talk (from anyone who wishes to
> > participate) on what the essence of the licence should be.
> ...
> > I then intend to build and discuss a set of use-cases that we want to be
> > covered.
> ...
> > By the time we are done with talk then hopefully a more mature draft of
> the
> > proposed licence will be available and we can move the discussion back
> to
> > legal-talk to validate the updated draft licence against the use-cases.
> I
> > think that this may be the main part of the job. As well as the licence
> I
> > think it will probably be useful to produce a 'dummy's guide' to the
> licence
> > that explains in normal simple English why each paragraph is there.
> 
> Excellent suggestion!
> 

I am glad you like it.

> > When we are done with that we will get external potential end-users to
> > validate against appropriate use-cases.
> ...
> > When we are done with that I think we will be ready to recommend the
> licence
> > on the main talk list. When we get agreement there we I suggest that we
> then
> > recommend it to top prolific contributors around the world and also with
> > providers of bulk-imports, in particular ensuring that the licence works
> > with major supplies, including yahoo, TIGER and AND. Finally we put the
> > email out to all 20,000 users.
> >
> > Are people happy with this process? Personally I think that if we skip
> any
> > one of the above steps these we will end up with an argument and failure
> to
> > get it through.
> >
> > I hope that this is compatible with what the OSMF are doing, however
> > following the best traditions of OSM, I am seeing a gap and just getting
> on
> > with doing what seems to need to be done.
> 
> I think it's a great plan.
> 

Thanks

> 
> Jonathan.
> 
> --
> .....................................................................
>            Dr Jonathan Harley   .
>                                 .   Email: jon at parkplatz.net
>             Zac Parkplatz Ltd   .   Office Telephone: 024 7633 1375
>             www.parkplatz.net   .   Mobile: 079 4116 0423
> 
> _______________________________________________
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk