On 22 July 2010 20:45, Graham Jones <grahamjones...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I am quite surprised there are many 'personal' contributors who would want > to refuse to have their data re-licensed - from my personal way of looking > at it the proposed new licence is so similar to the existing cc-by-sa that > it will make negligible difference. > > I thought the sticking point was about compatibility of the new licence > with some of our sources of data such as OS OpenData, which is why I got > interested in how much data is derived from OpenData (see separate > thread...) - The attribution requirements for derived works are different > between the existing and proposed licences - the main reason I can see for > refusing the new licence is if it will mean removing data derived from those > sources. > > He has contacted only the largest contributors. It is a bit of self serving mail to some extent. As he mentioned, he could twist the statistics as he would like. That's the main reason why the process is to allow for a non mandotary sign-up period for people willing to change. Only then we would have some real statistics to present to people. However, TimSC has to be commending for not trying to twist his stat in one or another. I would be curious to see if he worked with history data. And yes on many points, the new licence is very similar especially on the share alike point, but also introduces a larger change for produced work. I am not going to argue over what has been said in the past few things as it would be a waste of time. Emilie Laffray
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
