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

[ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen]

The CT/License Vote was IMHO not meant to be a serious democratic
process. Instead a majority was searched for a OSMF decision:
<cynism on>
like non anonymous voting for a single party in some countries
where your lose your job if voting against -fill in your favorite dictator-
<cynism off>
As long as the majority is massive, the result needs not to
be validated, although theoretically this voting system
is very subject to manipulation as it is.
Note that I do not accuse ANYONE of manipulation at all.
But  the voting process as carried out -while probably well 
representing a majority in favor of CT/ODBL- deserves
<understatement on>
no beauty price for democratic quality 
<understatement off>

Gert

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: M∡rtin Koppenhoefer [mailto:dieterdreist at gmail.com] 
Verzonden: vrijdag 17 juni 2011 17:47
Aan: Licensing and other legal discussions.
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CTs are not full copyright assignment

2011/6/17 Dermot McNally <dermotm at gmail.com>:
> On Friday, 17 June 2011, Olaf Schmidt-Wischhöfer <olaf at amen-online.de> wrote:

> I read your other mail on that topic. I don't personally have any
> objection to addressing weaknesses in the definition of "active
> contributor".


If we take the voting issues seriously we should also have a voting
system that is open (i.e. transparent, open source, registers
transactions, ...), breaks usernames down to natural persons (would
probably require external verification services or maybe a system like
CaCert where mappers can certify/authenticate each other by personal
contact and passport verification).

cheers,
Martin

_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk