Article 3 is the problem to me:
The Wiki says: 3. OSMF agrees to use or sub-license Your Contents as part of a database and only under the terms of one of the following licenses: ODbL 1.0 for the database and DbCL 1.0 for the individual contents of the database; CC-BY-SA 2.0; or another free and open license. Which other free and open license is chosen by a vote of the OSMF membership and approved by at least a 2/3 majority vote of active contributors. 1. OSMF has failed up to now to adequately define 'Open and Free' : That is a problem !! OSMF had better comply this term to a definition maintained by a third party such as Creative Commons and refer to that definitions. This way OSMF binds itself to the open community. 2. Article 3 makes you transfer the ownership (not exclusive) of your entered data to OSMF : That is a Problem !! OSMF is gathering this way the (non exclusive)ownership of OSM as a whole. OSMF is not a community but a foundation/association (company by guarantee in british legal terms) The transfer of ownership is against it own principles Wiki Citation: It is important to understand that the OpenStreetMap Foundation is not the same thing as the OpenStreetMap project. The Foundation does not own the OpenStreetMap data, is not the copyright holder and has no desire to own the data. Anyone can set up a few servers and host the OSM data using the same or different software. In this respect the Foundation is an organisation that performs fundraising in order to provides servers to host the project. Its role is to support the project, not to control it. Try to match article 3 with this wiki citation... This needs to be cleared up. Gert Gremmen
_______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk