On 5 January 2011 13:24, Frederik Ramm <frede...@remote.org> wrote: > Hi, > > On 01/05/2011 01:17 PM, Ed Avis wrote: >> >> If the new path for licence changes is well-thought-out and well-defined, >> why >> are we not using it now? > > I would love to, however if today 2/3 agree to the license change, we still > need to get an OK from the remaining 1/3 to continue using their data > because they have not signed up to any CT that would allow us to do so even > if they are in the minority. Also, there is no binding definition on who is > an active contributor (and thus has a right to vote). So this procedure > really is only possible *after* everyone has signed up.
There's no mandate or binding definitions for many things today, yet things (like license change) are happening, so I don't see a reason why it should be impossible for the OSMF to assume this definition (since it's well-thought-out) and follow that procedure. I think it's mostly a matter of good will. One reason that I have to recognise for not doing a real vote, only the new terms acceptation, is if OSMF thinks it's too much bother for users and too many difficult to understand questions will bore people who are really just interested in mapping. But I think it *should* be possible for every contributor to easily opt-in for a vote about all the important things currently decided by LWG or the board, like whether to stop accepting contributions under the old license, when, and most importantly whether "enough" people have accepted the CT to remove old data. But I fear that this will be decided in a small group similarly to the blocking of non-CT contributors in Apr. The original OSMF all-members vote basically asked if the OSMF should proceed with such and such procedure but I would assume (and perhaps not only me) that the intent of the voted question was "should we start and see how well it goes and at different points we look at it and see if we still want to proceed". Cheers _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
