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

Francis Davey fjmd1a at gmail.com
Fri Dec 3 07:49:59 GMT 2010


On 2 December 2010 15:43, Anthony <osm at inbox.org> wrote:
>
> 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.
>

Pedantically: OSMF has obligations under the CT so there's no
interpretation where the footing is equal or identical, but I see what
you mean.

My understanding was that this was not the intended outcome - that is
that OSM data should not be freely usable by everybody who receives
it.

As I have already said, I'm not sure that your interpretation is 100%
certain. The CT's at the moment place an obligation on OSMF to licence
under one of a series of licences, which would be an odd requirement
if such a licence were superfluous.

-- 
Francis Davey



More information about the legal-talk mailing list