On 20/07/2010, at 7:16 AM, Simon Ward wrote: > On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 12:04:55PM +0100, Emilie Laffray wrote: >> This is the same about anything using contract law. Someone breaking the >> contract and redistributing it doesn't remove the contract that is given >> with the data. They are still obliged to follow the contract even if they >> "didn't sign for it". I would be amazed that such a loophole exists in the >> first place. > > To my knowledge the contract isn’t automatically transferred, although > it occurs to me that it could be a condition of the licence that the > contract is also adhered to. I’m not sure this is the case.
If a contract says person A can't give the data to anyone and person A gives it to person B, then person B doesn't get to keep the data. However that isn't really relevant to ODbL, since the whole point of it is to force person A make the data available to people. As far as I'm aware there is nothing in the ODbL which requires you to make sure you form a contract with anyone you give the data to. I don't know how that would even work, since you are also required to make make the data available. It would essentially require you to form a contract with anyone who asks for the data, even if that is impossible (e.g. because they are a minor). All this contract stuff makes my head hurt. _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
