On 12/12/11 16:08, Michael Collinson wrote: > We have had a request for another big open organisation to re-use our > contributor terms [1] and summary [2] . > > Both the terms and the summary are by default already published under > CC-BY-SA 2.0. However, my initial thought it that it is more practical > to (also) offer them under a license that does not require attribution. > Legal pages get confusing when they contain text not completely to the > point, particularly to non-native language readers. PD0 springs to > mind. Does anyone think this is a bad idea and if so why?
It's a very good idea. CC0 might go too far (I don't know), possibly something like "you can copy and modify as you wish but don't claim it's the original" would be better. - Rob. _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
