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

andrzej zaborowski balrogg at gmail.com
Sat Jan 24 19:37:22 GMT 2009


2009/1/24 Rob Myers <rob at robmyers.org>:
> 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.

Voting on individual "features" of the license would minimise the
number of people that disagree.

Also a different question is bothering me.  The old license is the
well known CC-BY-SA, so it is automatically compatible with sources
(and consumers) using the same license.  So, say I've uploaded a lot
of information based on wikipedia, conscious that I'm uploading under
an "alike" license.  Now that the license changes, I would be obliged
to leave even if I agree with the principles of the new license
because I cannot agree to relicense data that is not my own (derived
works).

Excluding the part allowing the Foundation to implicitly introduce new
versions of the license might be sufficient for the license to be
"similar" under the definitions of Creative Commons.

Cheers




More information about the legal-talk mailing list