[od-discuss] OGL Surrey 1.0 - decision time

Fri Jan 9 23:27:28 UTC 2015

-1 for the same reasons (and as I further elaborated:
https://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/od-discuss/2014-November/001165.html).

On 15-01-09 03:25 AM, Andrew Katz wrote:
>
> -1 also for the same reasons.
>
>  
>
> Sometimes it’s possible to avoid this problem by allowing relicensing
> under a fully conformant licence. This is often a bit daft, as you
> might as well release under the alternate licence anyway, but there
> are sometimes reasons (good and bad) such as (1) fulfilling internal
> requirements of a specific body or organisation; (2) ego stroking; and
> (3) allowing relicensing under a less clear, but more commonly
> understood, licence.
>
>  
>
> -          Andrew
>
>  
>
> *From:*od-discuss [mailto:od-discuss-bounces at lists.okfn.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Peter Murray-Rust
> *Sent:* 09 January 2015 09:12
> *To:* Andrew Stott
> *Cc:* od-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> *Subject:* Re: [od-discuss] OGL Surrey 1.0 - decision time
>
>  
>
> -1 from me.
>
> I have re-read the discussion - which is closely and carefully argued
> - and don't dissent from any of it.
>
> Is there any general lesson we can learn here? The features seem to be
> extension of licences (perhaps forced by legislative / administrative
> requirements) and also restriction of downstream use. If, for example,
> every City in Canada proposed something similar, can we point to
> re-usable principles as in case-law?
>
>  
>
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 10:13 PM, Andrew Stott
> <andrew.stott at dirdigeng.com <mailto:andrew.stott at dirdigeng.com>> wrote:
>
> -1 for the same reason as Mike.
>
>  
>
> *From:*od-discuss [mailto:od-discuss-bounces at lists.okfn.org
> <mailto:od-discuss-bounces at lists.okfn.org>] *On Behalf Of *Mike Linksvayer
> *Sent:* 08 January 2015 18:15
> *To:* Herb Lainchbury
> *Cc:* od-discuss at lists.okfn.org <mailto:od-discuss at lists.okfn.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [od-discuss] OGL Surrey 1.0 - decision time
>
>  
>
> -1
>
>  
>
> https://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/od-discuss/2014-November/001155.html
> for why
>
>  
>
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 12:03 AM, Herb Lainchbury
> <herb at dynamic-solutions.com <mailto:herb at dynamic-solutions.com>> wrote:
>
> I believe we've discussed the OGL Surrey v1.0 sufficiently to assess
> conformance.
>
>  
>
> I now request that advisory council members indicate whether they
> agree that the license conforms to section 2 of the open definition
> (v2.0) found here:
>
>  
>
> http://opendefinition.org/od/
>
>  
>
>  
>
> Please use +1 for agree and -1 for disagree.
>
>  
>
>  
>
> You can find a discussion here:
>
> https://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/od-discuss/2014-November/001133.html
>
>  
>
>  
>
> You can find the text for the license here:
>
>  
>
> OGL Surrey v1.0
>
> http://data.surrey.ca/pages/open-government-licence-surrey
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
> We will continue counting votes for two weeks from now or until
> consensus is reached, which ever is first.
>
>  
>
> -- 
>
>  
>
> Herb
>
>  
>
>  
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> od-discuss mailing list
> od-discuss at lists.okfn.org <mailto:od-discuss at lists.okfn.org>
> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/od-discuss
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/od-discuss
>
>  
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> od-discuss mailing list
> od-discuss at lists.okfn.org <mailto:od-discuss at lists.okfn.org>
> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/od-discuss
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/od-discuss
>
>
>
>
> -- 
>
> Peter Murray-Rust
> Reader in Molecular Informatics
> Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
> University of Cambridge
> CB2 1EW, UK
> +44-1223-763069
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> od-discuss mailing list
> od-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/od-discuss
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/od-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/od-discuss/attachments/20150109/9bbb044c/attachment-0003.html>