[OSM-legal-talk] OS Opendata & the new license

[John Smith]

On 30 September 2010 18:31, Rob Myers <rob at robmyers.org> wrote:
> On 09/30/2010 02:56 AM, John Smith wrote:
>>
>> Those sorts of comments are made to distract from the real issue, that
>> they know that the license is most likely incompatible, and because it
>> most likely won't effect them personally. Yet they hold stead fast to
>> the current course of things regardless of the impact on others...
>
> Nobody has determined that OS data is incompatible (or that it cannot be

The lawyer for OS claims it isn't...

> made compatible if it is). At worst we have conflicting reports. I'll take

Considering that so far no one seems to be willing to compromise to
allow other similar licenses I strongly doubt that it will occur.

> legal advice over reported email comments in that case, though.

As myself and others have pointed out, the OS lawyer(s) claim it's not
compatible.

> Quite a few of the people in this debate who are in favour of the ODbL are
> from the UK. We would be affected by the loss of OS data if that actually
> happens.

What are you going to do if the CT or ODBL isn't changed so that is
compatible with OS data?