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

[Russ Nelson]

Tobias Knerr writes:
 > Russ Nelson wrote:
 > > Unless somebody has a theory under which there will be more mappers
 > > suing more users, the only rational conclusion can be that the license
 > > change will hurt OSM, and not help it at all.
 > 
 > I wonder why you believe that the only way a license change can possibly
 > help OSM is by allowing us to sue more users of our data.

A license is a threat to sue plus a list of reasons why you won't
that threat out.

 > Personally, I don't want to sue anyone.

Then you should put the public domain notice into your Wiki page, so
that everyone knows that you won't sue them under any circumstances.
I'm not asking you to do anything that I haven't already done.

 > However, I want to unambiguously have the right to publish an OSM
 > based map that doesn't provide attribution for every single mapper.

Then let's add a permission to the CC-By-SA which says "We won't sue if
you only attribute the project."

 > I also consider improved compatibility with other licenses for
 > produced works a welcome benefit.

Then let's add permissions to the CC-By-SA which say "We won't sue if
you combine this work with other licenses. Here are the
characteristics of those license which we deem acceptable."

 > And I'm almost certain that the legal and social environment in
 > which we operate will change during the next decades, so it would
 > be nice to be able to react to them by modifying the terms under
 > which we publish our maps; preferably without losing orders of
 > magnitudes more data than we might now.

Then let's add permissions to the CC-By-SA which say "I also grant the
OSMF permission to grant further permissions."

 > Some also think that the shift of share-alike from works onto data
 > makes sense, and I think that they have good arguments for that
 > position.
 > 
 > Clearly, there are a lot of advantages provided by the CT+ODbL that have
 > nothing at all to do with legal action against our users.

None of these are arguments for the CT+ODbL. They are arguments for
granting extra permissions to current licensees. The REAL purpose of
the CT+ODbL is to be a bigger stick with which we can beat up OSM
users.

-- 
--my blog is at    http://blog.russnelson.com
Crynwr supports open source software
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  |     Sheepdog