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

[Chris Fleming]

On 16/07/10 14:03, TimSC wrote:
> James Livingston wrote:
>> >/  Although, as Simon Ward said "Everyone has a say on whether their contributions can be licensed under the new license.", I am uncomfortable with the ODbL process and I resent not being polled before the license change was decided. OSMF has gotten this far in the process without checking they have a clear majority of contributors behind the process (and not just OSMF members).
>> /
>> How would you actually poll the contributors? The only way I could see it being done that satisfies everyone is in exactly the same way that the actual relicensing question is going to be asked, and that is a very heavyweight thing to do just for a "what do people feel" poll.
> If it were just a choice between CC-BY-SA and ODbL, I might agree. But this is a false dichotomy. We could write any number of licenses or revise ODbL based on feedback (except it would be better to resolve this soon). We could go PDDL, CC0 or PD. We could fork. We could do different licenses for different regions. We could do a single transferable vote or majority wins. The current relicensing question also doesn't distinguish between what I want for the future and what I would tolerate. So the question might ask in a poll is far from obvious.
>
>    

Although the intent of ODBl is to provide the protections we thought we 
were getting with CC-BY-SA; if we were to go to something *completely* 
different then I can image these discussions getting *really* nasty.

Cheers
Chris

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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20100717/dc532b03/attachment.html>