[OSM-talk] License plan

Ben Laenen benlaenen at gmail.com
Sat Feb 28 11:45:11 GMT 2009

On Saturday 28 February 2009, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> > My hope basically when starting this thread was that these
> > fundamental issues would have been cleared up by now in
> > legal-talk or wherever since you now made the schedule available.
> Seriously - who is this "you"?!!!

With "you" I mean the people who are pushing ahead with this license 
change. The license plan didn't just come out of nowhere. I'm sure some 
people discussed it somewhere. So I mean those people.

> There is no "you" in OSM. There's a big "us".

But just because there's a big "us", is it too much to ask "us" 
for "our" opinion about the license change and for "us" to 
mention "our" concerns to the people mentioned above (from now on 
referred to as "them")? I personally just don't like it that "they" 
just decided that in one month I have to immediately make a decision on 
relicensing my data. The implication of that question is too much to 
begin with, and as said I'm very wary that because I say "yes" I would 
pass the approvals across some kind of threshold which would delete say 
10% of all data and their derivative data which might include a lot of 
my work. I need to know first that that won't happen.

> So "I want a very detailed answer", in your previous message, is the
> wrong way to go about things.

Well sorry, but I really do want it. Who comes up with it (it could be 
me) doesn't matter. This should really be resolved before getting to 
the question we will all get in a month.


More information about the talk mailing list