On 24 March 2011 09:17, Simon Poole <si...@poole.ch> wrote: > > Thomas Ineichen has been so nice to update the (unofficial) German > translation to 1.2.4 > (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Open_Database_License/Contributor_Terms). > There is a small mater of dispute wrt to the intent of the English original > in 1 (a): > > "your contribution of data should not infringe .." > > Is the intent that the "should" is a legal mandatory "shall" or is it a > legal non-mandatory "should"? It seems that the French translation (based on > my awful French skills) would support the former. >
I have no idea what the difference between a legal mandatory "shall" or a legal non-mandatory "should" is. Its not a distinction I've met in practice. In context (which is how all contracts are read) it clearly means that the purpose of the contract is to ensure that the contribution of data does not infringe and to that end the contributor gives a warranty as to their state of knowledge about their right to authorize OSMF to do certain things. This is the 1.2.4 version. That clause doesn't sit well with the grant of a non-exclusive licence in clause 2 or clause 6.1 for that matter which is a no-warranty clause, but it can't mean anything else. If you explain the distinction you are making it may help. -- Francis Davey _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk