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

[Anthony]

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 12:19 AM, Russ Nelson <nelson at crynwr.com> wrote:
> Anthony writes:
>  >
>  > On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 2:57 AM, Russ Nelson <nelson at crynwr.com> wrote:
>  > > Mike N writes:
>  > >  >    Even a proper reversion script will cause much collateral damage for
>  > >  > the cases I'm aware of.
>  > >
>  > > The whole point behind having a license is to be able to sue people
>  > > who violate it.
>  >
>  > You've got it exactly backwards.  The whole point of having a free
>  > license is to waive the right to sue people who follow it.
>
> Errrr, no. If you want to wave that right, then you put your work into
> the public domain.

You seem to have missed "who follow it".

> Oh, but wait, you're Anthony. You don't just celebrate Backwards Day,
> you're working on Backwards Century.

Why the personal attack?  I wasn't calling you backwards, I was just
saying that you had gotten a fact backwards.

The purpose of a free license is to give permissions, not to take
permissions away.  If you want to sue people for violating your
copyright, you don't need a license at all.  If you want to sue people
for not violating your copyright, you need an EULA.