[OSM-legal-talk] [talk] New site about the license change

[kevin at cordina.org.uk]

But isn't the bit that's causing the bulk of the discussion a limited part of the CTs, not ODbL per se?

It strikes me as two issues - changing to ODbL and, separately, the inclusion of a clause in the CTs allowing a future unspecified relicensing by the OSMF.  The two aren't, necessarily, interlinked.

I haven't heard any fundamental objection to moving to ODbL, but lots of objections to the CTs.  Unfortunately the two seem to be being treated as one.

Kevin

------Original Message------
From: Richard Fairhurst
Sender: legal-talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org
To: talk at openstreetmap.org
Cc: legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
ReplyTo: Licensing and other legal discussions.
Sent: 16 Nov 2010 10:45
Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [talk] New site about the license change

[follow-ups to legal-talk, where this thread really should have started]

Kevin Peat wrote:
> Personally I don't care if the current license is weak as most
> organisations will respect its spirit and if a few don't who cares,
> it doesn't devalue our efforts one cent. I can't see how changing
> to an unproven license can possibly be worth fragmenting the
> project.

There'll be some fragmentation whatever happens. I've no doubt that,  
as you suggest, some people will leave if OSM moves to ODbL.  
Conversely, if OSM resolved to stick with CC-BY-SA then I'd leave as  
would several others. There is no "let's just carry on as at present"  
option.

Richard

_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk


Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device