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

[Stefan de Konink]

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

SteveC schreef:
>>>>> You're really advocating switching license without asking anyone?
>>>> Isn't he merely stating that if you truly believe CC-BY-SA doesn't
>>>> protect the data, you don't have to ask anyone to do so?
>>> to do what, relicense?
>> Exactly; if your statement is sound. CC-BY-SA doesn't protect us, thus
>> doesn't protect us against ourselves, thus OSMF could declare the data
>> today as ODbL, and wait to get sued by the editors that doesn't like
>> this change, if the CC-BY-SA holds the relicense has just been made a
>> copyright infringement and therefore wasn't required in the first place.
> 
> So you really are saying the LWG / OSMF should just ignore everyone and change the license?

This is the /only/ way to prove that CC-BY-SA is enough to have your
original data protected. If the outcome of such case would be that it
was legally sound to do so, you can victoriously claim that what the
OSMF was in the best interest of the project.

...but if the case was actually lost. CC-BY-SA would be suitable for
OSM, nothing changes and everyone is happy.


Now this is the point where the positive people come around again. "But
the BBC can't use our pretty pictures." Then the SA people should say:
"we don't care they don't share".


Your wish for consensus makes by definition your statement pro the
change based on 'CC-BY-SA is not enough' a thing that people like me
never buy unless there was a valid example where it actually /wasn't
enough/.


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

iEYEAREKAAYFAksevxgACgkQYH1+F2Rqwn234gCghLGJcgso9/mvnnK4GU+u94Mi
BT0AnjIsTR6+Gs00NHAhUqLEKgMoHkJQ
=HVqv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----