[foundation-board] CKAN licence?

[Ben Laurie]

On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 7:59 AM, Jordan S Hatcher
<jordan at opencontentlawyer.com> wrote:
>
> On 26 Aug 2011, at 18:00, Ben Laurie wrote:
>
>>> We may be limited in license choice because AFAIK we do not use contributors agreements for contributions that would allow us to migrate to a new license.  That means that OKF is just another licensee and not the copyright licensor with the ability to chose another license.
>>
>> This seems like a problem that needs fixing...
>
> Not sure I agree.  Wikipedia

Probably so.

> and many, many open source projects

No big ones that I'm aware of.

> operate on a model that doesn't involve assignment or contributors agreements to the central organisation.  Being constrained from unilaterally changing the project license is usually seen as a feature and not a bug by participants in a project.

Presumably an elected board would, in effect, be so constrained.
However, the ability to fix bugs in licences seems useful. Plus, I
don't like GPLv3 :-)

> Happy to look at this further as we evolve our thinking here.
>
> Thanks
>
> Jordan
>
> ____
> Mr. Jordan S Hatcher, JD, LLM
>
> More at: <http://www.jordanhatcher.com>
> Co-founder:  <http://www.opendatacommons.org>
> Open Knowledge: <http://www.okfn.org/>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-board mailing list
> foundation-board at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board
>