On 30 September 2010 18:31, Rob Myers <[email protected]> wrote: > On 09/30/2010 02:56 AM, John Smith wrote: >> >> Those sorts of comments are made to distract from the real issue, that >> they know that the license is most likely incompatible, and because it >> most likely won't effect them personally. Yet they hold stead fast to >> the current course of things regardless of the impact on others... > > Nobody has determined that OS data is incompatible (or that it cannot be
The lawyer for OS claims it isn't... > made compatible if it is). At worst we have conflicting reports. I'll take Considering that so far no one seems to be willing to compromise to allow other similar licenses I strongly doubt that it will occur. > legal advice over reported email comments in that case, though. As myself and others have pointed out, the OS lawyer(s) claim it's not compatible. > Quite a few of the people in this debate who are in favour of the ODbL are > from the UK. We would be affected by the loss of OS data if that actually > happens. What are you going to do if the CT or ODBL isn't changed so that is compatible with OS data? _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
