[OSM-talk] License/CT issues: Let's not punish the world's disadvantaged, pls.

[David Murn]

On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 17:22 +0200, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert
Gremmen wrote:
> @Eugene
> 
> Please do not extend the discussion with incompatible examples.
> My example fits exactly the description of what is called
> forking:
> Try 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_%28software_development%29  
> http://meatballwiki.org/wiki/RightToFork

Software forks are generally a bit different.  Imagine if Linus
proposed to change the Linux kernel licence to BSD-style (but with a
caveat that he could change it again to anything he personally decides
at any time in the future), then emailing all contributors and asking
them to accept the new licence or their work will be reverted.  Also
requiring all patches to be submitted through a website which only
allows submissions once you accept the new terms.

Say he then tells people all non-compliant code will be removed in 4-8
weeks unless they agree to the new licence, but says anyone is welcome
to continue using the existing code under the existing licence,  Say if
it gets to the 8 week mark and he decides 'well 90% of people have
clicked the agree button, therefore Ill just assume the other 10% no
longer have email and would have said yes'.

Now, say half a dozen developers decided to take the GPL codebase, call
it FreeLinux and continue development, while encouraging anyone who ever
contributed to the project under GPL and wants to continue using that
licence, to come over to their project.

That situation is far more compatible with whats currently happening. 

Im sure in that instance, you would support the continued codebase under
the licence youve used for many years, that is compatible with other
licences you use, and which wont have big chunks removed from it
sometime indefinitely in the near future.

Or would you blindly follow the 'official' codebase accepting the
decisions of the leaders without thinking for yourself?

David

> >On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 8:42 PM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert
> Gremmen <g.gremmen at cetest.nl> wrote:
> > The rotten thing here is that the ODBL fork has hijacked the domain
> name and
> > servers, because of .... mainly because a majority let them do it.
> >
> > So I feel it very unfair to call the continuation of OSM under
> CC-BY_SA,
> > in additon of being obliged to seek new resources (servers ,domain
> name and community)
> > are called a competitor with the aim of dividing the community.
> 
> Uh huh. So I suppose if there were a successful plebiscite in a
> country wanting to change their form of government from presidential
> to parliamentary (or vice versa) then that's a rotten thing unless the
> winning side leaves the territory to the losing side and create a new
> country with a new name?
> 
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk