[OSM-legal-talk] CTs and the 1 April deadline
Richard Fairhurst
richard at systemed.net
Wed Jan 5 12:41:19 GMT 2011
John Smith wrote:
> I still don't understand how data could be accepted on that basis
> in the first place, either there has to be firm statements that such
> data would be removed, not may be removed
As I said to Robert last night, I don't think you need to explicitly write
"we will not do anything illegal" into the Contributor Terms, whether the
illegal act is shooting Google executives or deliberately distributing
copyright material without permission.
So when the CTs say that "[OSMF] may delete that data", that's just a
warning to the user. It doesn't need to be a promise of "we won't break the
law" because that's taken as read - especially in the light of the clause
that starts off the whole of Section 1, "We want to respect the intellectual
property rights of others".
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/OSM-legal-talk-CTs-and-the-1-April-deadline-tp5887879p5891824.html
Sent from the Legal Talk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
More information about the legal-talk
mailing list