On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 11:23 PM, Jason Cunningham <jamicu...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Can I also be "sorry for being pedantic" and point out an issue with the > "license". > > The OSMF decided to base themselves in the UK and is > "A company limited by guarantee, registered in England and Wales. Company > Registration Number: 05912761" > > The Articles of Association > [http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Articles_of_Association] details the role > / function of the organisation in detail, and offers definitions of words > used. What is clear is that the decision to base themselves in the UK as a > British Company means the 'legal language' of the OSMF is British English. > > Now for the pedantic part.... > The proposed licence appears to be in American English, but doesn't state > that. > I think it is important that the 'core' or 'main copy' uses the language of > the country in which this company has based themselves, and the same > language as the 'The Articles of Association' > At the very least its 'bad practice' to have your 'Articles of Association' > in one language and your licence in second. > > It's a small issue to have someone suitably qualified read through the > American license and translate it into British 'legalese', but something > that should be done. Suppose you could move the foundation to the USA. > > It would also be worth looking at what Creative Common do, and provide the > licence in several different languages. >
See the discussion on porting of the license: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2009-May/002464.html Please also note that this isn't an OSMF license. The license has obviously been developed with a lot of input from OSM based people and the OSMF, but it is meant to be general purpose open data license. Dave _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
