[OSM-legal-talk] [DRAFT] Contributor Terms 1.2

[Emilie Laffray]

On 17 November 2010 11:00, Emilie Laffray <emilie.laffray at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On 17 November 2010 10:46, Ed Avis <eda at waniasset.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> 'other such free and open licence' should change to 'licence(s)'.
>>
>
> I think we should keep the free and open as it clears any ambiguities about
> OSMF potentially going rogue and imposing a proprietary licence (not that I
> see that happening at all). That means that by mandate, we will always make
> sure that the data is always available in a true open source fashion.
> I think it is clearly important as a sign that we have no desire to move
> from the initial statement to provide free data.
>

Sorry misread your comment. (Didn't realize you were just adding a plural).

Please discard my previous comment.

Emily Laffray
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20101117/d9c8c831/attachment-0001.html>