Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Contributor Terms upgrade ready
Hi, Kai described my concern with the currect CT wording very well. Is the LWG still working on a reply? I am asking because if the LWG is convinced that there is no problem, then we need to explain our concern is better words. Olaf > OSMF can't force you to accept them, but if you don't, you loose your > active contributor status and thus your right to vote. > > The "free and open" restriction probably still holds, but the vote does > seem to be circumventable by the method suggested by Olaf, by including > what you want to vote for in the new CT, then enforce those CT and finally > vote, once only those are active contributors who have already agreed to > the change through the new CT. > > Perhaps the vote can be extended to anyone who ever reached active > contributor status and responds to a request to vote within 3 weeks > assuming a reasonable effort has been undertaken to deliver the request to > vote. > > Kai ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Contributor Terms upgrade ready
On 18/01/2011 14:48, Mike Collinson wrote: The links below show the wording we will formally release. Thanks Mike. I'll look forward to a derivative of those appearing on https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/terms at some point in the future. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Contributor Terms upgrade ready
On 19 January 2011 02:10, andrzej zaborowski wrote: > On 18 January 2011 15:48, Mike Collinson wrote: >> The links below show the wording we will formally release. I will confirm >> when it is done. We will then set up and announce mechanism whereby anyone >> who has accepted the 1.0 terms can upgrade, this will be entirely optional. >> >> The wording drops one suggested change - the addition of the phrase, "and >> to the extent that you are able to do so" or similar into clause (2) - we'd >> like to look at this one further as it has some potential side-effects as >> currently worded. > > With this new version, do you/others think it is OK for people who So far all I've seen is contradicting information coming from people pushing for this change, one will say yes, another will say no because you have to give OSM-F the ability to change the license in future and they can't do this unless the information is done so by a copyright holder. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
