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

[Rob Myers]

On 07/15/2010 11:27 AM, Liz wrote:
>
> Offering a vote to those who paid a fee in pounds or euros to belong to a
> particular organisation (OSMF) and ignoring the far larger group who were not
> offered a vote but actually are the legal copyright holders does not make a
> valid poll.

It was a valid poll of those who were polled.

For those who weren't polled, the informal survey indicates that there 
is very little opposition to the change in reality.

As for copyright, broadly speaking there is no copyright (IANAL, TINLA). 
That's why the licence needs changing.


On 07/15/2010 11:28 AM, John Smith wrote:
 > On 15 July 2010 20:17, Rob Myers<rob at robmyers.org>  wrote:
 >> But non-votes are not "yes" or "no" votes. We cannot claim that they 
support
 >> or oppose relicencing.
 >
 > That's exactly my point, out of 270 people, it doesn't exactly inspire
 > a lot of confidence if only a half bothered to vote...

More than half. And within that more than half, the vote was overwhelming.

We cannot claim that the silent minority hold views one way or the 
other. They have not expressed a view.

This is how votes work. And this vote was passed. We are now onto the 
next phase.

 >> Given this, the facts are still that a majority voted and a clear 
majority
 >> of the votes were in favour.
 >
 > No, a clear majority would have been 2/3rds in favour, not just those
 > that bothered to vote, this shows there isn't overwhelming support,
 > but a lot of apathy because they don't care how things go or don't
 > understand the implications enough to do anything but fence sitting.

The majority of votes cast was more than 3/4 in favour. If we change how 
votes are measured to include those that didn't actually vote, I would 
again point out that less than 10% of the total possible voters oppose 
the change. Those who support the change are less apathetic than those 
who oppose it.

 >> Would I rather more people had voted? Yes. But that doesn't 
invalidate the
 >> outcome.
 >
 > Why doesn't it, there wasn't a clear majority of those eligible.

There was a clear majority of those that voted.

Votes can only count those that vote. If everyone else doesn't care, 
that means only that they don't care, not that they are silently for or 
against.

 > If
 > OSM-F are only stewards, rather than the more active role in things
 > that seems to be occurring, shouldn't it be more fitting to poll
 > active contributors, as other have outlined there is a lot of people

People will be able to vote with their data once the voluntary 
relicencing system is in place.

 > unable or unwilling to be members of OSM-F, but that doesn't mean they
 > don't want a say in how things continue especially if they are putting
 > a lot of time and effort into community building and other PR
 > activities.

I can understand that. All I can say is that there are public forums 
such as this one in which people can make their views known, and that 
the OSMF Board has always contained a good mix of competent individuals 
of diverse views who do listen to and participate in those forums.

- Rob.