[OSM-talk] [Announce] OSMF license change vote has started

[Stefan de Konink]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

SteveC schreef:
> On Dec 8, 2009, at 12:38 PM, Stefan de Konink wrote:
>>> The point is that *morally* you want the data to be PD and
>>> *morally* I want it to be SA. The legal points you make are just
>>> supporting cases that you're cherry picking to help you.
>> I don't *morally* want PD, I *morally* want attribution.
> 
> There you go! Everything else is window dressing to support your
> moral argument. Now I can in good conscience point you at the decades
> of BSDvGPL argument. Why do you want to sit around repeating it?

Is it? I'm currently perfectly fine with the fact that attribution is
guaranteed by the OSM license currently used. I'm not fine with the fact
I cannot share with people after a license change because they don't
want to adopt a new license :)

Because I do care; 4.5 basically kills your SA argument...



Stefan
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.13 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEAREKAAYFAksesbwACgkQYH1+F2Rqwn29CgCfW1URl96VtF3VZN5Tgq2t86Tq
cSQAmQEzZbd0fknO4UF3jWCiz5wStdUH
=pY9F
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----