There is nothing in the CTs about what happens if either party breaches the contract
On 8/24/10, 80n <80n...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 8:25 PM, Francis Davey <fjm...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 23 August 2010 19:58, 80n <80n...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > I'm curious about the meaning of the word "irrevocable" in the >> contributor >> > terms. >> > >> > Having examined a number of licenses that grant a similar range of >> > rights >> > (worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, perpetual) none of them include >> > irrevocability. They also all contain a termination section that is >> usually >> > engineered to allow termination in the event of a breach. >> > >> > Am I right in thinking that if OSMF committed a material breach of the >> CTs >> > then contributors would not be able to revoke their grant of rights? >> Does >> > the common law right to repudiate trump the inclusion of an >> irrevocability >> > clause? >> >> I assume you mean "fundamental breach" > > > Yes, that was the term I was searching for. > > >> since a material breach of >> contract may not be sufficiently serious to permit the other party to >> repudiate it. Off the top of my head I don't know any specific law on >> the subject, but if OSMF's conduct struck at the very root of the >> contract (i.e. it was a fundamental or repudiatory breach) then I >> cannot see any reason why the contractual element of the CT should not >> be revocable. >> >> I'm less sure about the licence element. >> >> -- >> Francis Davey >> >> _______________________________________________ >> legal-talk mailing list >> legal-talk@openstreetmap.org >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk >> > -- Sent from my mobile device _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
