>But I do feel slightly uncomfortable that my edits, which I've now agreed >should be licensed under ODbL, can currently be used by fosm to build a >>CC-by-SA competitor project which aims to divide our community.
The community has always been clear that the continuation of OSM with with a new ODBL is a legal way of forking the project. Just as legal as continuing OSM with CC-BY-SA. After all planet dumps have been made available for that, as well as diffs. That is also a majority decision. The rotten thing here is that the ODBL fork has hijacked the domain name and servers, because of .... mainly because a majority let them do it. So I feel it very unfair to call the continuation of OSM under CC-BY_SA, in additon of being obliged to seek new resources (servers ,domain name and community) are called a competitor with the aim of dividing the community. That is an odd way of saying the the majority is always right, and if wrong they are right anyway ! And history has shown us and shows us every day again where that opinon can lead to. Regards, Ing. Gert Gremmen, BSc g.grem...@cetest.nl www.cetest.nl Kiotoweg 363 3047 BG Rotterdam T 31(0)104152426 F 31(0)104154953 Before printing, think about the environment. -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Van: Graham Stewart (GrahamS) [mailto:gra...@dalmuti.net] Verzonden: Thursday, June 23, 2011 2:20 PM Aan: talk@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] License/CT issues: Let's not punish the world's disadvantaged, pls. Frederik Ramm wrote: > > Legal subtleties are best discussed on legal-talk. If you care to make > your suggestion there, I'd be willing to point out why it doesn't work ;) > Fair enough Frederik, if it's a legal subtlety then I probably don't want to know! :) But I do feel slightly uncomfortable that my edits, which I've now agreed should be licensed under ODbL, can currently be used by fosm to build a CC-by-SA competitor project which aims to divide our community. 80n is correct when he said: 80n wrote: > > From here on in, OSM loses ground against fosm.org. The mass deletions in > OSM (if they ever happen) will put OSM further behind. > But only because fosm can currently stay in sync with OSM and still claim CC-by-SA on updates that are made under the new CTs by contributors that agree with the move to ODbL. -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/License-CT-issues-Let-s-not-punish-the-world-s-disadvantaged-pls-tp6504931p6508098.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
