On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 6:09 PM, Ian Dees <[email protected]> wrote: > On Dec 5, 2009, at 4:09 PM, Tom Hughes <[email protected]> wrote: > > Polling the OSMF members is just the first stage - there will another > > vote later when all contributors will be asked whether they want to > > relicense. > > > > Why not start with that step? >
No sense in wasting everyone's time if the OSMF members aren't going to agree to it anyway? On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 6:18 PM, Ulf Lamping <[email protected]>wrote: > So translated: If you do not agree to what the OSMF wants, the OSMF will > remove the data that you have collected over the last years. It'll still be there. In perfect form for the fork which will inevitably arise. On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 8:11 PM, Richard Fairhurst <[email protected]>wrote: > Creative Commons, of course, has practising copyright lawyers too. They > have > said that CC-BY-SA isn't applicable to data and we shouldn't use it. > It isn't applicable to data in jurisdictions where data can't be copyrighted. Part of the proposal of switching to the ODbL is to go *beyond* copyright law by imposing an EULA (which you are deemed to have accepted simply by visiting the OSM website. That's the part that worries me, and which I suppose will cause me to stop contributing (I haven't completely decided yet, though).
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
