2009/4/19 Frederik Ramm <frede...@remote.org>: [snip]
> > But you do drive home the point that any license that counts on an > unbroken chain of prior acknowledgment of a contract ("I only give you > this data if you agree to ...") will not work. Violation of such a chain > has been a theoretical construct until now ("what if someone in China > simply re-posts the file without restrictions..."), and you make it real. > I'm not entirely sure about the context of this discussion (but assume that the cross-post means it doesn't matter) but the whole point of a licence is that it operates without there being a chain of covenants. I may have misunderstood you of course, but that should not be a problem. In almost all jurisdictions various information rights are property rights, which means they operate against everyone. The licence is a permission to use (say a work) without violation of the rights holders rights. I.e. the default is total restriction, which may only be bypassed via the licence. It is irrelevant whether a use of the information is aware of the licence since it is permissive not restrictive (although it may be constructed by stating exceptions to a generally given permission). -- Francis Davey _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk