[OSM-talk] Licensing Working Group

Russ Nelson nelson at crynwr.com
Fri Mar 25 04:11:05 GMT 2011


andrzej zaborowski writes:
 > On 23 March 2011 11:37, Thomas Davie <tom.davie at gmail.com> wrote:
 > > I'm not sure this is the lie though.  The lie would be "zomg, not many users are accepting the ODbL"
 > 
 > I don't think that would be a lie.  "Much" or "little" are of course
 > fuzzy but I think here you have to use a sort of a logarithmic scale
 > and I hope the license change working group is going to use that scale
 > when/if they're deciding whether the moment is right to remove data
 > from the editable database.

Y'know, I'm not understanding something. People whinge about CC-By-SA
not being free enough, and that OSM should be public domain. The
proper response to them (which I think most people agree with) is: if
you don't like the license, fork the project.

So why aren't the ODbL folks being told the same thing? You want a
different license? Hey, great, no problem, go ahead, create a fork of
OSM. But don't expect us to follow you.

Here's what I say to everyone who wants to change the project's
license:

                        FORK OFF!

-- 
--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       



More information about the talk mailing list