On 12 August 2010 11:18, Peteris Krisjanis <[email protected]> wrote: > What can I do I agree to relicense my stuff under ODbL, but I can't > agree with CT Section 3? I hoped LWG will think about removing it, but > it seems that relicensing is already started without investigating > complain about section 3.
I assume you're worried about the the potential license incompatibility caused _if_ the OSMF (along with a 2/3 majority of contributors) decided to change the license to a non-SA license when your data (perhaps from imports) has an SA requirement? If so then I guess that it simply means that since there is an incompatibility then the non-SA license cannot be used (i.e. it _can't/won't_ be voted in) or the incompatible data will be removed. No-one is going to violate any licenses (if that's what the supplies of the imported data are worried about) since legally we _can't_. That clause is simply there so that we have flexibility in the future to re-license without so much of a hoo-ha as this time :) -- Matt Williams http://milliams.com _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
