[OSM-legal-talk] New phrase in section 2

[Anthony]

On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 3:00 AM, Francis Davey <fjmd1a at gmail.com> wrote:
> The better question to ask at this stage is, what is it for not what
> does it do? I didn't draft or propose this wording, but someone must
> have done and someone, or some people, must have an idea of what its
> function is supposed to be.
>
> It may be that a better wording to do (whatever it turns out to be
> for) will solve the problem, or it may be that there's a policy
> argument, which can be sorted out first before you get to the wording.

I have no idea why it was actually put there, but one positive thing
it does (besides nullifying the ODbL) is that it puts us all on an
equal footing with OSMF.