[OSM-legal-talk] Licence Implementation plan - declines or non-responses

James Livingston lists at sunsetutopia.com
Mon Aug 30 12:42:38 BST 2010


On 30/08/2010, at 10:03 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote:
> If the majority of the community (including OSMF and the sysads who run the servers) agrees with the license change, why should the onus of forking be on the license-change agreers? If this is indeed the case, then the ones who should fork are those for CC-BY-SA 2.0.

It all depends on what exactly you mean by the word "fork". You could very well say that there is going to be a ODbL re-licensing fork, it's just that the one hosted by OSM would change to be that fork rather than the existing data.


More information about the legal-talk mailing list