[OSM-legal-talk] CTs are not full copyright assignment

[Tom Hughes]

On 11/07/11 09:20, Olaf Schmidt-Wischhöfer wrote:

>> If you have a better way of defining "active contributor" that is
>> workable then please tell us what it is.
>
> I see no reason to limit the voting right to people who fit the definition of
> "active contributors".

The main reason is that otherwise it will effectively become impossible 
to change the license because there will, over time, obviously be an 
ever growing group of people who are no longer involved, interested 
and/or contactable and once they become a majority the clause would in 
effect become null and void because it would be impossible to exercise.

If that is your aim, to ensure that the license can never be changed 
again, then fine - that is a perfectly respectable position to take.

It would be dishonest to try and get that to happen via the back door 
though, by supporting a vote but ensuring that it will in practice be 
impossible.

Tom

-- 
Tom Hughes (tom at compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/