At 01:14 13/08/2010, Liz wrote:
On Thu, 12 Aug 2010, Mike Collinson wrote:
> At 02:58 PM 12/08/2010, Robert Whittaker (OSM) wrote:
> >PS: I'd be interested to know if the current CTs have had any legal
> >review from OSMF's lawyers...
>
> Yes. Our initial desire was to have something very short, more in-line with
> what is now the summary [1] but they were re-written professionally ...
> and came back, well, much longer. We then worked compressing it to the
> minimum and had each small change explicitly reviewed. A number of changes
> were also proposed by kind folks on this list and were subjected to the
> same review.
>
> Mike
>
> [1] http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Contributor_Terms_Summary
>
the output you get from a lawyer is dependent on the input
so you ask a question and the lawyer answers that question.
we can't decide anything about the lawyer's contributions unless we
know what
the original questions were.
Drafts are available at
http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Group_Minutes . Look for
"Licensing Working Group, Contributor Terms (working document, not a
final version)"
However as you are only seeing the last revision per physical
document, the earliest appears to be draft 11 ... so does not
directly answer the question you are asking.
I will dig out the earliest draft I can find in history diffs and
publish as a separate document.
Note also that we originally intended a very short version that
pointed to (drafts of) Database Contents License (DbCL) . You can see
the later v1.0 version at
http://www.opendatacommons.org/licenses/dbcl/1.0/ and that there is a
high correspondence of phraseology.
Mike
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
