[OSM-legal-talk] CT, section 3

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 11/26/10 15:24, Olaf Schmidt-Wischhöfer wrote:
> My thought experiment was based on being locked out of the server, being
> unable to contribute, and thereby loosing the right to vote.

I agree that the CT currently seem to have no provision to make sure 
that someone who *wants* to be an active contributor can indeed do that. 
This could be fixed.

Your thought experiment was based on the idea that OSMF could quickly 
change the CT to require something else than a 2/3 majority. I hope I 
managed to make it clear that this was a misunderstanding on your part; 
even if they managed to lock you out, they could not change the terms to 
which you have agreed.

>> This is pure speculation. I think that very people will be so
>> short-sighted that this is an issue for them. I mean, you can be for or
>> against anything right now, but if you are not blinded by ideology of
>> any sort then you will have to accept that times change, and that
>> *anything* you try to enshrine for eternity will hurt the project.
>
> I do not see any reason to continue the discussion with you after these
> ad-hominem attacks.

I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings. I am just trying to make you, and 
others, understand that in 10 years time the project will likely have 
100 times as much contributors as we have now. Picture yourself next to 
100 people who have come after you, who have taken what you have given 
to the project and who have built on it, improved it, made it "their" 
project.

Do you *really* think it is right to say: What's mine is mine, and if 
those 100 people in 10 years make any step that I don't like then I will 
withdraw my work from under them? Because they will have built on your 
work in good faith, thinking that we were all creating something 
together; they will perhaps find themselves in a situation where they 
feel they need to make a change in the license to adapt to changed 
circumstances - nobody can foresee what the world will be like then. And 
you request the right to command them, to threaten them with withdrawing 
your 10-year-old contribution and all the interest it has accrued (by 
others building on your work, improving it).

It may be *legally* possible to have a right to take your contribution 
away then, but I think it would be morally wrong, and I would sincerely 
ask anyone who feels the desire to pull the rug from under the project's 
feet in 10 years time if the project doesn't do what one likes: please 
recosider, and if you still cannot trust the project enough that you can 
let go of your contribution, then leave.

Bye
Frederik