[OSM-legal-talk] Can someone summarise arguments for/against clause 2 of CTs?

Rob Myers rob at robmyers.org
Thu Sep 23 14:13:32 BST 2010


On 09/23/2010 01:52 PM, Anthony wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 4:12 AM, Rob Myers<rob at robmyers.org>  wrote:
>> On 09/20/2010 05:14 AM, Steve Bennett wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm asking about Clause 2: specifically,
>>> why does OSMF need special rights over contributors' data?
>>
>> OSM(F) needs to be able to place contributions under BY-SA now and later
>> under the ODbL.
>
> Why do they need to do this?

So that the data(base) can be switched to ODbL.

> Specifically, why can't the contributors
> do this themselves?

They are agreeing to the change.

>> OSM(F) may also need to relicence the data again in future, as Clause 3
>> indicates. Clause 2 makes this possible.
>
> I understand that explanation.  But not the other one.

 From the point of view of two or five years ago, this is the future.

- Rob.



More information about the legal-talk mailing list