[OSM-legal-talk] CTs and the 1 April deadline

[Anthony]

On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Anthony <osm at inbox.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
>> Such an opt-out clause
>> would mean: We're not a community building something together, we're a pot
>> where everyone can temporarily put their personal contribution but remove it
>> at any time.
>
> On the rest, we're going to just have to agree to disagree.  But I
> think this depiction of an opt-out clause is quite unfair.  An opt-out
> clause doesn't allow you to remove your contributions at any time.  In
> fact, it doesn't allow you to remove your contributions at all.

Ah, now I see I may have been unclear.  Above I said "Let people
remove their data if they don't agree to future licensing terms."
What I meant was "Let people decline relicensing of their data if they
don't agree to future licensing terms."  They wouldn't be allowed to
remove the data from the database they contributed to, licensed under
the license they contributed it under.