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

Reply via email to