On Tue, 13 Jul 2010, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > 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
And the arrangement was that whether the licence change went ahead or not depended on how many people agreed to relicense their data So it is still a vote _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
