[OSM-legal-talk] definitions of "free" and "open"

Grant Slater openstreetmap at firefishy.com
Mon Apr 11 08:09:42 BST 2011

On 11 April 2011 08:04, Francis Davey <fjmd1a at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2011/4/11 Krysha Krysha <krysha at rambler.ru>:
>> Hello!
>> Why in the Contributor Terms does not contain definitions of "free" and
>> "open".  Different organizations may have different understanding of these
>> terms. For example, there is a Microsoft Open License ... The absence of
>> these definitions stops me from taking those Contributor Terms.
> I think the idea is that it will be up to contributors to decide
> whether a licence is "free" and "open" rather than leaving it to
> lawyers to do so.

In addition, Contributor Terms v1.2.4 also now reference
Source: http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Contributor_Terms


More information about the legal-talk mailing list