[OSM-legal-talk] Is the license change easily reversible?

[Jonathan Harley]

On 19/02/12 12:50, Rob Myers wrote:
> On 19/02/12 11:17, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>> But, even after the switch to ODbL, OSMF could go back to CC-BY-SA 2.0
>> at any time - and would, as far as I can see, only need a simple
>> majority board decision for that.
...
>> Could we - could OSMF - in such a situation simply say: "Know what, Mr
>> big guy? Either you play nice and release that data, or we'll simply go
>> back to CC-BY-SA 2.0 next month."
> Yep. Although they could continue to use the existing data. Which might
> make delicensing feel less of a(n immediate) threat.
>
>> I don't assume that we would really *want* to go back but it wouldn't
>> exactly kill us, and depending on what is at stake (I assume it could
>> easily be a multi million dollar thing) we (the project) would lose much
>> less than those we'd be up against. We wouldn't really want to but we
>> *could*, and the fact that the big guy would only have to piss off the
>> wrong four people at OSMF to ruin his product could balance one thing or
>> the other in our favour.
> Protecting the freedom of individuals to use the data that OSM gathers
> and distributes isn't about pissing people off, etc., but yes there is
> apparently a nuclear option there.
>
> The collateral damage would be eye-watering though, in terms of burnt
> karma, lost trust, and punishment of innocent actors.
>

It really would - and would surely lead to a big, permanent fork of the 
project. A company with a big investment in something based on 
ODbL-licensed OSM would undoubtedly go on using it, and would probably 
invest in attracting people to contribute to it. If people are willing 
to contribute to sign-all-your-rights-away maps like Google Maps and 
People's Map, they might well have some success.

Certainly any other companies thinking of using OSM would prefer to 
invest in the ODbL fork than an OSMF "license has changed twice and 
might change again" fork. Many ordinary mappers who don't care about 
licensing might also be inclined to join up with a "it's ODbL and we're 
never going to bother you with changes to CTs again" effort.


>> 2. Are we happy with OSMF board wielding this power - should we (the
>> OSMF membership) perhaps curtail OSMF board's powers by creating a rule
>> that says that any decision regarding the license under which the data
>> is published must be taken by the whole membership and not just the board?
> Do you mean the foundation membership or active contributors to OSM?
>

Either would be better than leaving it to the board; I'd be happy with 
it being the OSMF membership.


Jonathan.

-- 
Dr Jonathan Harley   :    Managing Director    :   SpiffyMap Ltd

md at spiffymap.com      Phone: 0845 313 8457     www.spiffymap.com
The Venture Centre, Sir William Lyons Road, Coventry CV4 7EZ, UK