[OSM-legal-talk] CTs and the 1 April deadline

[John Smith]

On 5 January 2011 02:08, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 01/04/11 17:02, John Smith wrote:
>>
>> On 5 January 2011 01:48, Frederik Ramm<frederik at remote.org>  wrote:
>>>
>>> No, that is not acceptable to me. Someone who participates in OSM must
>>> have
>>> the willingness to accept what the majority wants, or else they should
>>> not
>>> participate in the first place.
>>
>> Ummm where is the majority of OSM contributors that want to switch to
>> CT/ODBL and in the process loose lots of map data?
>>
>> So far I've only seen a minor-majority of OSM-F members agreed to some
>> kind of process that might lead to a license change, and a majority of
>> OSM-F board members agree to a license change.
>
> Luckily we're now all signing up to the CT which will, for the first time,
> establish a well-defined path for any future license change, so the
> situation you complain about will be the last of its kind.

So you agree there is no current statement from the majority of
contributors as to what they want, just what a small minority are
forcing through regardless of the consequences or wishes of others?