Kevin Peat schrieb:
On 25 August 2010 08:41, Frederik Ramm<frede...@remote.org> wrote:
It is bad enough if the share-alike minority force their will on the rest
of the project now; we must not allow them to force their will on everybody
who is in OSM in 10 years' time.
I find this oft-repeated argument to be totally bogus. It's like saying that
I shouldn't paint my house because the person who owns it in 10 years time
might not like it.
No. It's like saying you shouldn't paint it with a non-overpaintable and
non-removable paint because you or a future owner might want to
overpaint it in 10 years - or just refresh the paint (i.e. to a new
version of the ODBL "paint" we're putting up right now).
If OSMers in 2020 don't like the license they are free to change it or to
start a new project just as people are today.
Only if there's a good agreement now that allows that in a reasonable
way. And that's what the CTs are for.
Contrary to what you are saying, we are _not_ free to change it right
now, in fact, it's quite difficult to do so without a reasonable CT, as
we're seeing with all those painful discussions.
(BTW, I'm just a normal mapper, I'm not a member of the OSMF or of any
working group right now or have been at any time in the past.)
Robert Kaiser
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
