On Sat, 16 Apr 2011 08:11:11 +0200 Mike Dupont <jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 6:14 PM, Anthony <o...@inbox.org> wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 6:55 PM, Frederik Ramm <frede...@remote.org> > > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > David Murn wrote: > > >> > > >> Out of interest Grant, what other large-scale open source > > >> projects have changed their licence the way that OSM has? In > > >> fact, changed their licence full-stop..? > > > > > > Wikipedia went from GFDL to CC-BY-SA. > > > > Wikipedia went from GFDL to a GFDL/CC-BY-SA dual license - with the > > help of the FSF. > > > > If OSMF wanted to go from CC-BY-SA to a CC-BY-SA/ODbL dual license, > > that would greatly simplify things. > > > > > Yes, that would make great sense, but I would like to see some more > expert opinions, expecially the people who build this entire open > source thing to begin with. > Did anyone ever contact Eben about this new license? The gpl was the > basis for the creative commons, and you are saying it is not good > enough, so I think you should be able to convince him as a lawyer > about this. > > If this new thing is really needed, then it should be easy to > convince the experts about it. > > Here are two points I would like to see : > 1. a porting of the new terms to other languages and jurisdictions. > 2. a review and blessing of the new contract by the software freedom > law center, the open source institute and the creative commons > > There is not even a porting of the new terms and license and contract > to other jurisdictions, or translations. > At least creative commons has tried to port itself to other places > > You are asking people to agree to some contract that is not > translated into their language and may not be applicable in their > jurisdiction, they might even be minors, I find this needs to be > looked at carefully. > > Lets get the license and contract submitted to < > license-rev...@opensource.org>, and to > <cc-commun...@lists.ibiblio.org>, for even a discussion outside this > little circle, even an opinion from Lawrence *Lessig* or Eben Moglen > softwarefreedom.org, would greatly interest me. > > It should be possible to get bessings from legal experts and license > experts in the world of open source and free software. It should be > possible to get this contract reviewed and approved by OSI as well. > > I personally will wait and see what people who I trust and respect > have to say about this topic who are not involved and not partial, > some type of neutral and calm review of the entire situation. > > This entire discussion has gotten very emotional and personal, lets > get some neutral third party expert opinions. > > mike So has anyone asked the FOSS gurus of licensing? I have never seen it mentioned while I was subscribed to legal-talk. I am quite prepared to start writing emails (phrased neutrally) requesting an opinion if these people have not been asked before. If then the opinion is that the new licence has merit, we then need work on how the contract provisions "fit in" with other legal codes not just those derived from either the Westminster or Napoleonic codes. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
