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

[80n]

On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Richard Fairhurst <richard at systemed.net>wrote:

>
> Elizabeth Dodd wrote:
> > I still don't agree with this approach. It doesn't sit with my idea of
> > democracy. When people vote they need to know for what they
> > are voting, and what the cut off marks are considered to be.
>
> It's not a vote.
>
> It's a request by the OpenStreetMap Foundation for you personally to
> consider relicensing your contributions. The only question you're being
> asked is "do you agree to relicense your contributions?".


The problem is there's no time limit either.  The process can be allowed to
drag on for another 5 years if necessary.

All the time that there is uncertaintly about the license it is harming the
project.  Deterring potential contributors and confusing prospective users.
How much longer should this be allowed to continue?


You are not being
> asked to vote on what you think should happen to others' contributions -
> you
> can't be, they own the rights and neither you nor me nor OSMF can relicense
> them without their permission. You should tick the box solely according to
> what you are willing to permit with _your_ contributions.
>
> I hate to get all meta, but there seems to be a lot more "fear of fear of
> the ODbL" than "fear of the ODbL" (not to say the latter doesn't exist).
>
> cheers
> Richard
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/License-Cut-over-and-critical-mass-tp5279719p5286683.html
> Sent from the Legal Talk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20100713/5d5d579b/attachment.html>