[OSM-legal-talk] Nearmap vs CTs: any progress?

[Steve Bennett]

On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 6:52 PM, Francis Davey <fjmd1a at gmail.com> wrote:
> It doesn't look "stalled" to me:
>
> http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Group_Minutes

Thanks, I didn't know about the minutes page (not that I had looked).

> The current working draft license terms suggest this is not the view
> taken by its drafters and they do not intend it to be the outcome:
>
> https://docs.google.com/View?id=dd9g3qjp_933xs7nvfb

True, when I compare it with version 1.0, that looks like the major
change - explicitly not requiring the contributor to be the
unencumbered copyright owner. So that part is good.

However, this part remains: "Subject to Section 3 and 4 below, You
hereby grant to OSMF and any party that receives Your Contents a
worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable licence
to do any act that is restricted by copyright..."

As Ben has pointed out, this section retains the assumption made
previously: that you have the right to grant these rights. Which,
under any CC licence, you don't.

So, I guess we sit and continue to watch the evolution of the CTs. I
understand that it is not trivial finding wording that meets
everyone's needs.

Steve