[OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license violations

[NopMap]

!i! wrote:
> 
> Was just an idea, cause I noticed that here aren't that much people 
> interested in this topic, so I assumed at legal mailinglist are more 
> people that are familar with the OSMF processes. And I didn't saw a 
> reason to 'annoy' this official list with this very specific topic.
> 

Actually, I believe that the topic is very well placed here.

The licence change is a matter that has been discussed widely,
controversially and extensively.

The funny thing about this is: If nobody is willing to enforce a licence
when it is being violated, if nobody cares whether it is respected or
ignored - then there is no need for a licence, a licence change or
discussion about it at all, it's all void and the OSM data is effectively
"involuntary public domain".

Therefore I'd say: Either be consistent and and look for a way to politely
but firmly enforce the licence - or be consistent and drop the licence
altogether.

bye
                Nop


--
View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/A-reliable-process-for-handling-OSM-license-violations-tp6190047p6192875.html
Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.