[OSM-legal-talk] [DRAFT] Contributor Terms 1.2
fjmd1a at gmail.com
Thu Nov 18 11:13:08 GMT 2010
On 18 November 2010 10:59, Ed Avis <eda at waniasset.com> wrote:
> That all makes sense but even in the revised 1.2 draft it is not implied by
> the language. The CTs ask you to grant an unlimited licence over the Contents,
> without any exemption from this requirement if some rights in the Contents are
> held by third parties. Since I cannot grant an unlimited licence to Contents
> derived from Ordnance Survey OpenData, I cannot agree to the CTs.
Yes, indeed. This is a point I have made on numerous occasions
already. I also understand that various proposed wording to update the
CTs to take that into account has been proposed (by you, me and
others) and I am sure its under consideration. The fact that no
wording like that is there is almost certainly just a because its
still in draft form. The LWG are, I am sure, well aware of the need to
do something about the wording, but haven't had time to do so.
> See elsewhere on this thread where I suggest a clarified wording.
Yes. I saw. I'm rather busy right now or I'd suggest something myself.
I am somewhat reluctant to do too much suggesting on an open list
since I am a lawyer and I'm not instructed by OSMF.
More information about the legal-talk