On 9 December 2010 23:15, Ed Avis <e...@waniasset.com> wrote: > Grant Slater <openstreet...@...> writes: > >>If at some mythical future date the OSMF decided to propose a new >>license; they would have to be damn sure at being able to convince at >>least 67% of us that this new proposed license was "free and open" on >>our terms. > > Well, 67% of 'active contributors' however defined. The definition of active > contributor can probably be altered by the simple expedient of blocking > contributions from those who don't click 'agree' to any proposed new policy. > > Of course the current OSMF management act in good faith and would never > do such a thing, but in theory it is possible. >
OSMF would have to block 1000s [1] of contributors/mappers for a period of at least 10 months, stop them from creating new accounts and do this all without upsetting the rest of the contributors (electorate). While a theoretical, I simply do not see it happening. OSMF would end up with a rapidly ageing dead copy of the database and we the contributors would move onto a new-OSM. 1: In last 30 days 12194 users have edited nodes alone. Source: http://www.openstreetmap.org/stats/data_stats.html Regards Grant _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
