[OSM-legal-talk] "current license terms"

[Anthony]

On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 9:37 AM, Mike Collinson <mike at ayeltd.biz> wrote:
>
> At 01:10 AM 17/01/2011, Anthony wrote:
>>https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1sC0SrG_R6OkRDdC3IJKlmDEn2pYTY2DZfcpSLFdiBBU
>
> Latest and greatest:
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1jY58fD3JyNUjzmecrpNejoOt4OnfHeEM-6o8rD5hCLY

More like latest and worst.  Among other things, it now says "OSMF
agrees to that it may only use or sub-license Your Contents as part of
a database".  :rolls eyes:

>>And after the CC-BY-SA content is removed it means ODbL and
>>DbCL?
>
> It means ODbL and DbCL once we have formally changed from CC-BY-SA.

Which means what?  Obviously OSMF has to remove the CC-BY-SA content
*before* it can stop requiring people to submit data which is
compatible with CC-BY-SA.  What step is "formally changing from
CC-BY-SA"?

>>At what point, if any, does the database become one where OSMF can't
>>switch back to CC-BY-SA without removing data?
>
> If 2/3 of active contributors vote for CC-BY-SA then OSMF can switch to it. If there was some data in there that somehow could be distributed under ODbL but not under CC-BY-SA, then it would either have to be removed or the IP owners contacted for permission.

At what point, if any, are people allowed to contribute data which is
not compatible with CC-BY-SA?