[OSM-legal-talk] To calm some waters - about Section 3

Emilie Laffray emilie.laffray at gmail.com
Wed Aug 25 11:09:24 BST 2010


On 25 August 2010 10:23, Kevin Peat <kevin at kevinpeat.com> wrote:

>
>
> On 25 August 2010 08:41, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> It is bad enough if the share-alike minority force their will on the rest
>> of the project now; we must not allow them to force their will on everybody
>> who is in OSM in 10 years' time.
>>
>>
> I find this oft-repeated argument to be totally bogus. It's like saying
> that I shouldn't paint my house because the person who owns it in 10 years
> time might not like it.
>
> If OSMers in 2020 don't like the license they are free to change it or to
> start a new project just as people are today. We should make a decision on
> what seems like the best choice as we see it today not what someone may want
> in 10 years time.
>
> I am quite happy for OSMF to have the power to upgrade to newer versions of
> ODBL as the license matures to save all this hassle again but there should
> be some sensible limits on what the OSMF can do otherwise it is open to
> abuse.
>


I believe that an agreement of 2/3 of active contributors and a vote of the
OSMF members is quite a nice garantee.
John mentioned that someone could just create lots of account, but honestly
I suspect that kind of behavior would be caught quite easily and dealt with
accordingly. If I was to detect, I would no doubt seize the board to see how
to exclude those and make sure that we have a fair vote.
This is really to empower the community in the end, not to try to shaft it.

Emilie Laffray
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20100825/da2fc58d/attachment.html>


More information about the legal-talk mailing list