[OSM-legal-talk] CT clarification: third-party sources

[Francis Davey]

On 10 December 2010 08:28, Francis Davey <fjmd1a at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Eg, the open government licence (UK) requires that certain conditions
> are met, eg that data protection rules are not broken and that a form
> of attribution is used. The contributor would be in breach of the
> licence if they contributed without ensuring attribution at the time
> of contribution (for instance).
>
> But, _after_ the contributor has made their contribution, they don't
> need to rely on the licence to do any act restricted by IP rights. The
> contributor has ceased copying/making available to the public etc. The
> contributor cannot be primarily liable after that, whatever OSMF may
> do.
>

My mistake: I doubt that the UK open government licence is
sufficiently "viral" for this to be a possibility. I am sure readers
can think of some more specific example of licence/licence violation
and it might be useful to have one concrete example to work with.

Moral: anything I type before 9:00am is going to be suspect.

-- 
Francis Davey