[OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data

[andrzej zaborowski]

Hi,

On 5 August 2010 02:12, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
> Also, there's no reason to wait with the fork until some later date in the
> license change process. Indeed, some people are even today holding back on
> edits which are based on sources that might not be ODbL compatible - because
> they fear it would all be for nothing. If they'd be given the chance to
> contribute their stuff to a purely CC-BY-SA fork then perhaps they would.

I'm not so sure, I think I know people who are in the situation you
describe.  However there's a difference between continuing on the same
project with the same community (even if the project changes name and
license) and switching to a totally different one.  (There's some
emotional ties because of having invested a lot of time in the success
of the project, there's the fun of your data being used by actual
real-life users like skobbler, there's having to tell your friends
"remember the project I talked to you about? well, forget what I said,
use that other one".)

However I'm thinking that it should be possible to set up a ODbL fork
of OSM once contributions from non-relicensed users are blocked.
There have been voices on this list of at least a couple of
contributors (or indirect contributors like nearmap.com) who would
likely accept the ODbL but not ODbL+CT.  That fork would have to use
the CC-By-SA copy of the OSM database for the period until OSMF
releases a ODbL planet.  It could pull minutely diffs under CC-By-SA
into the database too.  Its contibutors would have to dual-license
their contributions under CC-By-SA and ODbL for that period.  At the
same time it could publish CC-By-SA weekly planets / minutely diffs,
and later ODbL ones, which the OSMF could easily include in its
database or planet snapshots. (For all the time until another license
change process is started by OSMF in 2035)

Cheers