[OSM-talk] Objects versions ready for ODbL

[Simon Ward]

On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 11:25:05AM +0100, Simone Cortesi wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 10:00, Stephen Hope <slhope at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I must admit, however, that basically handing the keys to the OSMF,
> > which is what the new CT's amount to, is not filling me with joy
> > considering their track record to date. I'm willing to do a certain
> > amount of work to make sure the data I've provided over the years
> > isn't lost, but if they jerk me around too much or make it too hard
> > I'll just write it off as a loss and spend my free time somewhere it's
> > appreciated.
> 
> this is no way different from GPL released software:
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.html

That’s not a requirement for using the GPL to license software.  That
article talks about why they think copyright assignment is a good idea
(but not any cons), and that it is required for projects under the
umbrella of the FSF, such as the GNU Project.

Simon
-- 
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a
simple system that works.—John Gall
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20101221/3e37f611/attachment.pgp>