[OSM-legal-talk] License Cut-over and critical mass

[Chris Fleming]

On 13/07/10 11:47, Liz wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Jul 2010, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>    
>> Tobias Knerr wrote:
>>      
>>> And exactly that is the problem. Mappers didn't have a say in
>>> starting the license change process
>>>        
>> Yes, they did. After about four years of licence discussion among mappers,
>> OSMF held a vote last autumn in which 89% of respondees approved the
>> process
>> (http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2009-December/000753.h
>> tml).
>>      
> Only members of OSMF had a vote.
>    
Yes but people had plenty of notice that this was coming up.

>> In addition, OSMF holds annual elections where anyone can stand and put
>> forward their views, and if elected, work to have them implemented -
>> exactly the same way that your country's democracy works.
>>      
> We realise that.
>
>    
>> Of course, not everyone is a member of OSMF, but if you don't choose to get
>> involved in the running of the project then you can't really complain if
>> decisions are taken that aren't to your liking.
>>      
> A common statement by those "on the inside".
> Membership of OSMF costs money. I have enough money for that sort of expense
> but not everyone does.
>    
True it does cost money; but it's not a massive amount.

As far as I'm concerned this should be straightforward; CC-BY-SA doesn't 
work from any perspective, it doesn't provide the protections that I 
would expect as a mapper and the uncertainty stops people from using the 
data. Lets relicense our data and put the effort of discussing what if 
scenarios into getting in touch with those who have not responded.

Cheers
Chris

-- 
e: me at chrisfleming.org
w: www.chrisfleming.org