[OSM-talk] What could we do to make this licences discussion more inclusive?

[Kevin Peat]

On 17 July 2010 20:40, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
<snip>

> It should really be "Would you find it acceptable if OSMF relicensed the
> whole dataset to ODbL without asking for consent from individual
> contributors, thereby making sure that there is no data loss, but
> disregarding individuals who might be against the change?"
>
> If OSMF were to do that, they would likely be sued by a number of
> principled objectors; we'd have to factor in a legal budget to deal with
> that. It should not be too much because those legal advisers that have told
> us that the CC-BY-SA would likely not hold in court would simply have to
> tell the judge the same ;)
>
>
I would rather we just relicensed and if contributors object then we delete
their contributions. That way I would think it unlikely anyone would get
sued and we'd lose the absolute minimum of data, rather than deleting loads
of data just because some contributors haven't kept their email addresses
up-to-date even though they would probably agree to the change if we could
contact them.

We could ask everyone upfront if they were likely to object to the change
and so remove most of the uncertainty there might be.

I don't think this is like the CDDB case at all as they had less honourable
motives as I understand them.

Kevin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20100718/9d3549f3/attachment.html>