Renaud MICHEL wrote:
Hello
On dimanche 25 septembre 2011 at 14:23, Jo wrote :
I'm sending the following message to everybody who hasn't decided yet. Up
to now I sent it to all contributors who still have 1-150 elements in
the database in Belgium. From those I managed to have 8 extra people who
agreed. That's not all that much, but it's better than nothing.
Especially since their contributions form part of a chain. I've been
sending out messages like these before, which resulted in 4-5 people who
agreed.
[...]
OSM changes its license. Could you please check whether you can agree to
release your contributions under the ODBL? The idea behind the license is
mostly the same as with CC-BY-SA. ODBL is more suited for a database,
which is what Openstreetmap is, at the core.
If you can't agree to the new license and contributor terms, your
contributions will have to be removed to move forward. This may have
consequences when people have built further on elements that you touched.
All their efforts may have been in vain as well.
For people like me who would like to try and save as much as possible
data, it means we have to put in inordinate amounts of time to sort out
what can be saved and what needs to be dropped.
So, please, log in for a moment on www.openstreetmap.org and indicate
whether you agree or not to the new license and contributor terms.
This is not accurate, no decision has been taken (yet) to change the license
from CC-BY-SA to ODbL. What is being asked now is to accept the
contributor's term which grant a wider right to the OSMF by allowing it to
relicense one's contributions if 2/3 of active mappers agree on the new
license.
The current target is ODbL, but maybe ten years in the future the community
at that time may choose another license that they consider more appropriate.
So by accepting the new CT, the contributors must actually have the required
rights on all their contributions to grant this to the OSMF.
For example, in the case of data contributed by some administration or
private enterprise, the person who imported them in OSM must be sure he is
allowed to accept the CT (some people explicitly refused the CT because of
such problem).
cheers
That is also not accurate.
Actually, You are accepting both, and the new OdbL license for your
existing and future contributions, and the new contributor terms, which
makes it easier to change the license again, if there is a reason to do so.
For this change from CC-BY-SA to OdbL, everyone has to give its
acceptance, for changing to another (that would be then the third)
license a 2/3 majority is sufficient.
There is no license change from OdbL in the short future necessary or
foreseen, and so these contributor terms aren't strictly needed now, but
it is a good provision to be ready in a distant future for a
modernisation of the OdbL license should it be needed, and then the
transition will be much smoother by this majority principle.
See in detail:
http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/We_Are_Changing_The_License#What_Are_The_Choices.3F
Regards,
Gerard.
_______________________________________________
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
