[OSM-legal-talk] Licensing Working Group report, 2009/01/22

[Rob Myers]

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
be avoided?

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.

- Rob.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 260 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20090124/399dff35/attachment.pgp>