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

[Anthony]

On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 8:34 AM, 80n <80n80n at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Ed Avis <eda at waniasset.com> wrote:
>>
>> (*) But is this really the policy wanted?  So an individual contributor
>> has no
>> choice - they have to grant an unlimited licence and suck up any future
>> licence
>> changes.  But a third party can veto licence changes - or insist on data
>> deletion, which is more or less the same thing.  Why the difference in
>> treatment?
>>
> If you publish your data under, say CC-BY, and then contribute it to OSM
> under the third-party clause then you can avoid granting an unlimited
> license.

You would probably need have to have *someone else* contribute it to
OSM.  You might even have to have never agreed to the Contributor
Terms yourself (*).  But otherwise, yeah.

(*) I say "might", because while the new CTs added the phrase "in this
user account", it's not clear to me whether or not this is sufficient.

A good definition of "Your Contents", along with an explanation of the
fact that Your Contents don't include Other People's Contents, would
probably be a good addition.