Hi,

pec...@gmail.com wrote:
License is fine. It is CT which in fact still allows OSMF to change
data license to any other "free license" (which could be strip "share
alike" and "attribution" requirements) what blocks usage. In fact,
there is NO license which allows such CT to coexist. Only PD, and
that's even not working in all countries.

I'm sure that if, at any time in the future, the OSM license needs to be changed, it will be into something that works in all countries.

We don't know if it will ever be necessary; we don't know what that license might be; we don't even know which countries will be around then and what their legal systems will look like. Think long-term! This is not a clause aimed at next year.

I know that ODbL team talked about changing description of "free
license", but I don't see any official statements about that. I'm
afraid that PDists got their way all over again.

ODbL is not a PD license, so you do not have to be afraid. As for the distant future - we don't know who will be in OSM then, what their preferences will be, and wheter you and I will be alive then. I think it is ok to let those who *then* run OSM decide, instead of trying to force onto them what we today think is right.

And legal-talk is that way --->

Bye
Frederik

--
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-t...@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Reply via email to