Elizabeth Dodd wrote: > I still don't agree with this approach. It doesn't sit with my idea of > democracy. When people vote they need to know for what they > are voting, and what the cut off marks are considered to be.
It's not a vote. It's a request by the OpenStreetMap Foundation for you personally to consider relicensing your contributions. The only question you're being asked is "do you agree to relicense your contributions?". You are not being asked to vote on what you think should happen to others' contributions - you can't be, they own the rights and neither you nor me nor OSMF can relicense them without their permission. You should tick the box solely according to what you are willing to permit with _your_ contributions. I hate to get all meta, but there seems to be a lot more "fear of fear of the ODbL" than "fear of the ODbL" (not to say the latter doesn't exist). cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/License-Cut-over-and-critical-mass-tp5279719p5286683.html Sent from the Legal Talk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
