[OSM-legal-talk] Rights granted to OSMF (Section 2 of the CT)

Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org
Sun Apr 17 11:16:25 BST 2011


On 04/17/2011 10:51 AM, Florian Lohoff wrote:
> But has been a major point of problems in the past. Have a look at
> the GCC issues. Patches will not be submitted because a transfer of
> copyright is a no go for some.

Firstly, in the CT case we're not talking "transfer of copyright".

Secondly, I have no evidence about whether, on the whole, the net effect 
on GCC is negative because of those non-submitted patches; it is 
possible that if another license regime were found for GCC, other 
patches would be non-submitted instead.

Thirdly, this is a situation in which pragmatism and ideology clash. I 
tend to be a nasty ideologist in many situations, but I think a large 
project like OSM demands that everyone is willing to make some 
compromises for the project to flourish. I'd prefer to have pragmatic 
people who help us build the map than ideologues who explain their 
myriad "no gos" to me. I'd love to be able to convince these people to 
work with us on the things that really matter for the future of OSM, but 
if they are unwilling to be pragmatic then let them go and found their 
own, ideologically clean OSM. "realosm.org" is still available. I'm sure 
they will have great discussions there, full of energy and positive 
attitude, a real sense of community and the ideal climate to really get 
things done.


More information about the legal-talk mailing list