[OSM-legal-talk] CT, section 3

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 11/26/10 16:24, Mike Dupont wrote:
>> 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?
>
> please stop at this point.
>
> We are not talking about withdrawing anything here, some people have
> decided to make an unpopular decision to change the license to
> something incompatible here. No one is withdrawing anything.

But wasn't Olaf's whole point that he wanted to retain his right to 
withdraw his contribution from OSM if at any point in the future the 
project should decide to change the license to something he does not like?

> If you have a license, then make it closed, dont leave any loopholes
> or blank check rules in there that involve trusting some unknown set
> of people that can change at any time. Make simple rules and I will be
> happy.

But that's what I am saying: "OSM in 10 years" is an unknown project in 
an unknown environment. How can we have the hubris to say "we know 
what's best for OSM in 10 years"?

> The problem that I see is that you dont have the terms worked out and
> you want us to agree that you will figure out the problem in the
> future, because of some vague fears that someone might abuse the
> current license.

I think the terms are worked out quite well. The new license is ready 
for use. It may have bugs but we won't find them until we try. The 
reason we have the relicensing clause in there is not only that ODbL may 
be found to be buggy, but also that the environment in which we operate 
may change. For example, it might happen that first the EU, then every 
other country in the world agrees to release their geodata under a new 
free and open data license called, say, "FODL". Data released under FODL 
would be interoperable and every geodata user in the world would get 
used to dealing with FODL data. FODL would become the de-facto licensing 
standard for open geodata. Only OSM would still use an outdated license 
named ODbL that nobody really understands anymore and that it not 
interoperable with FODL data, because, 10 years ago, they decided to 
sign that license with blood for eternity. ODbL might be the best 
license there currently is for geodate - but it might not be so forever.

> Well let me tell you , I think you should work out your licenses, make
> it really nice and tight and then present it for review, don't ask us
> to sign away all future rights.

Nobody is being asked to "sign away all future rights". You are asked to 
grant OSMF a very clear and limited right to do certain things with the 
data you have contributed, under certain conditions. There is nothing 
unsure or unclear about this.

Bye
Frederik