On 24 July 2010 00:02, Richard Weait <rich...@weait.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Liz <ed...@billiau.net> wrote: >> On Sun, 11 Jul 2010, Kai Krueger wrote: >>> So far the the impressions I got from the members of the licensing group >>> vary from anywhere between e.g. 10% data loss is acceptable to as high as >>> 90% data loss is acceptable (as long as a majority of signed up accounts >>> agree), which means as far as I can interpret, there is no where close to >>> an agreed process even within the licensing group. >> >> When do we get an answer to this question set? >> Almost 3 weeks have gone, and again no straight answers. >> It has become quite obvious that some are happy with a very large data loss >> for some areas of the planet. How much data loss will they accept on their >> own >> sector of the planet? > > Dear Liz, > > you say, "It has become quite obvious that some are happy with a very > large data loss..." > > I see two problems with this, Liz. Who are you suggesting is "happy"? > > Also, there will be no data loss.
The reason it's similar to data loss is that OpenStreetMap will keep advancing very fast like it is now, while my data remaining CC-By-SA only will be left to bitrot (I'm probably not going to update it even myself, instead I may re-join OSM with a new account). An important strength of OSM is that it's a single database, not chunks you have to combine before using, and that it is up-to-date. So if OSM changes license, rather than fork under a new license, the old data will effectively be lost, it's only nitpicking saying it's not really lost. You also talk about choice, a lot of mappers will not have a choice to promote their contributions because of sources they have used (though I'm sure many of them will agree to relicense anyway because they don't read the legalese). I might be able to re-license under ODbL but not under CT. I'm wondering if the OSMF may include the "Decline, but I can make my contributions available under ODbL" option in the re-license question page, this would allow it to include data by the affected contributors in the new planet snapshots until another license change happens. At that point I may again be able to ask the sources I used if they agree with that license. I can not ask them to agree to a license that is not specified, and even myself I'm not comfortable being asked this. Cheers _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
