[OSM-legal-talk] New license for business: meh

[Nic Roets]

Declaring conflicts of interest is pretty standard procedure. And Anthony,
if you decide that your are only concerned with the license, then this email
is not for you.

But if we are like Wikipedia (who forked over the advertising issue), we
will look for conflict on interest beyond the licensing debate. And the
interests of OSMF conflicts with all the businesses involved to some extent.
The community are continuously saying that they want to use as few external
sites as possible, but the businesses wants us to use their sites for
numerous reasons: To debug their products, to promote products and perhaps
at some point sell advertising.

On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 10:18 PM, Anthony <osm at inbox.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Nic Roets <nroets at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I can't speak for Chris, but you [Frederik] don't make me nervous because
> you're quite
> > open and you don't drive any issues that may have business implications.
>
> He doesn't make me nervous, but I wouldn't want him (or anyone else)
> to have any say in the relicensing of my contributions.
>
> On the other hand, who cares?  "You make me nervous and doubtful."
> "You make me sad."  Isn't there a discuss-your-feelings-l for this
> stuff?
>
> _______________________________________________
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20100822/6630af7a/attachment.html>