[OSM-talk] Voluntary re-licensing begin

[Markus]

On 12 August 2010 11:18, Peteris Krisjanis <pecisk at gmail.com> wrote:

> What can I do I agree to relicense my stuff under ODbL, but I can't

> agree with CT Section 3? I hoped LWG will think about removing it, but

> it seems that relicensing is already started without investigating

> complain about section 3.

 

I assume you're worried about the the potential license

incompatibility caused _if_ the OSMF (along with a 2/3 majority of

contributors) decided to change the license to a non-SA license when

your data (perhaps from imports) has an SA requirement? If so then I

guess that it simply means that since there is an incompatibility then

the non-SA license cannot be used (i.e. it _can't/won't_ be voted in)

or the incompatible data will be removed.

 

No-one is going to violate any licenses (if that's what the supplies

of the imported data are worried about) since legally we _can't_. That

clause is simply there so that we have flexibility in the future to

re-license without so much of a hoo-ha as this time :)

 

 

Why couldn't this be added to CT Section 3 saying.

 

 

If the OSMF does decide to change the licence, any existing data that may
then not be compatible will need to be removed.

 

Markus_g

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20100812/d0554715/attachment.html>