Am 14.07.2010 01:26, schrieb John Smith:
There has been a slightly disturbing thread on the legal-talk list
about defining critical mass, so far things aren't any closer to being
defined and statistics are being abused to suit positions:
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2010-July/003453.html
At this stage I'll not be agreeing to ODBL, not because I disagree
with the license, but because I disagree with the process being used.
Without some better criteria being employed to make the process less
subjective and prone to personal bias it will be as 80n put it, a
simple wait game until things go their way, I don't think this is the
right thing to do, it's a kind of sleazy politicking tactic to achieve
an unfavourable result desired by a minority...
A lot of the points in this thread was already discussed by others and
me around 2009. The whole license (change) discussion in 2009 (to my
understanding) boiled down to: Become member of the OSMF or shut up and
follow our judgement.
See what our (IMHO not so) respectful OSMF chairman and project founder
Steve C had to say about license (working group) critics in December 2009:
http://fakestevec.blogspot.com/2009/12/fable.html
I had hoped that after the dust settled a bit the OSMF learned from
these discussions, but reading the above legal talk thread I still see
the same elitist behaviour from the "inner circle" as before - very sad
to see :-(
Regards, ULFL
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
