[Osmf-talk] License with or without virus

Matt Amos matt at asklater.com
Tue Dec 8 01:52:48 UTC 2009

80n wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 1:30 AM, Henk Hoff <henk at toffehoff.nl 
> <mailto:henk at toffehoff.nl>> wrote:
>     2009/12/8 Matija Nalis <mnalis-openstreetmap-osmflist at voyager.hr
>     <mailto:mnalis-openstreetmap-osmflist at voyager.hr>>
>           Forget from which license to which we are proposing changing.
>         What I'm
>           talking about is question if the damage that WILL be done
>         (data loss,
>           contributors alienation, etc) is worth the benefit (better
>         protection
>           from the "bad guys who won't share")? And "is this right time
>         to do it,
>           are there really so many bad guys abusing OSM at the *moment*
>         ? Or would
>           it perhaps be better to change it when it becomes obvious that
>         they are
>           really becoming the problem, instead of now?"
>     But then you're too late. And then the damage is even worse. 
>     The right time to do this was when the OSM project started. We've
>     gone way past that point. There's never going to be a right time (=
>     having no damage) anymore.
>     - How many bad guys should be abusing OSM before we say "That's
>     enough, let's get our stuff under another license!"
> How many bad guys have abused OSM data so far?

i count two that have announced it publicly; Anthony and RichardF. how 
many others who haven't announced it, i don't know.



More information about the osmf-talk mailing list