[OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

[kevin at cordina.org.uk]

I agree, but this is still a great deal of freedom.

A PD licence would be free and open, but is a very different beast to ODBL.  There is therefore the scope to very significantly alter the license without the direct agreement of a contributor to the specific terms.

K

Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

-----Original Message-----
From: Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org>
Sender: legal-talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org
Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2010 10:25:23 
To: <legal-talk at openstreetmap.org>
Reply-To: "Licensing and other legal discussions."
	<legal-talk at openstreetmap.org>
Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

80n,

On 12/07/10 10:08, 80n wrote:
>     So, the const-ness you're looking for is in fact there - just not on
>     the level on which you are lookign for it.
>
> Not at all.  A 2/3rds majority of *active* contributors can change the
> license under which everyone elses content is published.

Yes. But no majority in the world can change the rules under which you 
will have contributed your data (the contributor terms), even if you're 
long dead. Your data will always be under these terms, which allow OSMF 
to choose the license for redistribution providing they meet certain 
criteria that you have agreed to.

There is *no* way for OSMF to, for example,

* license the data under a non-free or non-open license
* license the data under a license not agreed to by 2/3 of active 
contributors
* change the definition of "active contributor"

without asking you. These parameters of your agreement with OSMF are 
fixed and cannot be changed without renegotiation with you personally.

Bye
Frederik

_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk