Hi, Simon Ward wrote:
For my part, I don’t fully agree with the contributor terms, and I suggest we start there because they are also what I’ve seen other people voice their dissent about.
As I said, if you intend to further restrict possible future license changes via the contributor terms to something more narrow than "free and open", you should be prepared to offer more license choices now, rather than just the "yay or nay" to ODbL.
The contributor terms are linked to the license change question and cannot be viewed in isolation.
I would also like to draw attention to the fact that OSMF members - among them, I believe, yourself - have approved the process, including the current version of the contributor terms, with a 89% majority in December last year. You weren't vocal on the contributor terms in the months before so I am somewhat surprised that you're starting to voice your disagreement half a year after the vote. Of course anyone can have second thoughts - but remember that any change to the contributor terms would require repeating that OSMF member vote.
Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
