[OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap License Change Phase 3 Pre-Announcement

[David Murn]

On Fri, 2011-04-15 at 17:09 -0700, Kai Krueger wrote:
> Dermot McNally wrote:
> > 
> > FWIW I would have favoured earlier specific requests for a vote, but
> > it's basically been an impossible position for the LWG from what I can
> > see as an outsider.
> > 
> 
> No, the vote part really isn't that difficult. Wikipedia managed to hold a
> vote on their licensing change.

I never followed the wikipedia change, but did they create a new
untested licence?  Did they ask users to agree to the licence over a 12
month period?  How many changes/revisions did their licence undergo
between being announced and finally being accepted?

Im fairly sure the answers to these questions is significantly different
to the answers in the OSM licence change situation.

David

> Dermot McNally wrote:
> > 
> > But mappers who just plain _won't_ agree to leave their data in, even
> > though there is no legal obstacle to it, should strongly consider
> > whether they are being true to the community they claim to be a part
> > of.
> > 
> 
> Until there is a clear vote of the community to determine what they want it
> is impossible to say which side of the debate is "true to the community". At
> the moment, we simply don't know. And so it is unhelpful to accuse long time
> OSM enthusiasts as not being "true to the community" because they disagree
> with your opinion. Many of them have the community just as much at hart as
> the proponents. They just disagree or are unsure on the effects this change
> will have on it.
> 
> Kai
> 
> --
> View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/OpenStreetMap-License-Change-Phase-3-Pre-Announcement-tp6266295p6278003.html
> Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk