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

[Francis Davey]

On 18 November 2010 04:21, Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 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.
>

In another thread elsewhere I said that I think that may just be a
drafting error - in other words the intention is to qualify that
sentence to make it clear that you only grant those rights you have
(which is all you can ask a contributor to do). As drafted a court
might imply such a condition anyway, but it is right to make it clear.

But this can be done by adding a suitable phrase such as "to the
extent that you are able" or "to the extent that you own any
intellectual property in...." (thought that would exclude licensees
with a right to sublicense).

-- 
Francis Davey