[OSM-legal-talk] Licensing Working Group report, 2009/01/22
rob at robmyers.org
Sat Jan 24 15:27:01 GMT 2009
Peter Miller wrote:
> Without a public vote the board are effectively saying to each and
> every one of use individually: 'accept these new terms or please
> leave the community now and don't slam the door - oh, and we will
> remove your data shortly'. Clearly this approach will result in lots
> of people slamming doors!
I cannot imagine people leaving if they agree with the licence, and I
cannot imagine people who disagree with the licence staying whether it
is announced or voted on. Doors will slam either way.
> There would be no evidence that the majority of the community agreed
> with the new license,
Unless the majority relicence.
> and there were always be accusations of foul
> play from the inevitable splinter groups.
There will anyway.
> To be clear, this must be a 'whole community' vote, not a vote by
> board members, or even just by foundation members.
How will the community be defined and how will irregularities and fraud
And how will a silent majority who don't care about licencing not be
represented as a vote against the new licence?
> I suggest a threshold is set for acceptance as it stands. If that
> threshold is not met then it isn't necessarily back to square one - it
> might be possible to come back again with a revised version that meets
> the concerns, but the clear aim is to get it adopted in one go.
I don't think a vote is necessarily a good thing. I do think public
review is a good thing, however fed up everyone may be.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 260 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the legal-talk