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

[John Smith]

On 16 July 2010 19:57, Rob Myers <rob at robmyers.org> wrote:
> We're probably hitting different usages here.
>
> https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Majority

Again, 'clear majority', not just a majority...

> I'm sure someone could also hack any vote that required a log-in. Which
> doesn't really get us anywhere.

It's considerably ups the stakes, either that or OSM security and/or
end user passwords are abysmal...

> It means they disagree with the change-over to the licence.

Then why has it always been phrased 'ask contributors to agree to the
new license for THEIR data' rather than 'ask users to vote for the new
license' ?

> Then complaining that there is not an estimate is futile.

Originally I thought an estimation of what was a acceptable loss of
data was the way to go, but I ultimately decided there was a better
way to do it.

>> Several people have made suggestions on how to prevent this from
>> occurring, but you don't seem interested.
>
> s/interested/convinced/

Regardless, what is the harm, that is of course you are worried it
will only back fire.

> Failure to agree with someone does not always indicate failure to understand
> them.

You seem to have done both.

> I will quite happily upset the entire planet. But that is not my intention.

What exactly would be the point in that, so you tick off everyone so
they fork and leave you to play in your own sandpit by yourself?

> Has anyone asked the Australian or New Zealand governments how scared they
> would be of ODbL?

It was hard enough to get them to release data at all under any kind
of favourable license, it's unlikely you will actually try and help
with this and all you are doing is dumping extra work in someone
else's lap for no benefit to them.

> It's doing something.

I can flap my arms up and down to do something, doesn't mean it's
productive or useful at all.

>>> All there is to fear is fear of fear. ;-)
>>
>> The road to hell is paved by good intentions...
>
> Indeed.

And that's where the fear comes in, just because you may have good
intentions doesn't mean that it won't harm my goals.