On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Andy Allan <gravityst...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Further to what Frederik has said, there's a couple more points that > are important. The OSMF receives legal advice on matters relating to > the license change, and as far as I'm aware they are forbidden from > making the legal advice public. If I recall correctly there was a > problem about a year ago where the legal advice was publicly quoted > and it had to be redacted from the mailing lists. Such is the nature > of legal advice. > OSMF is not forbidden from making the advice public. It may be disadvantageous to some people who may not want it generally known, but it is not forbidden. The terms of engagement between OSMF and WSGR say that it is in the clients best interest to preserve the confidentiality of all communications. But this appears to be boilerplate and relate to Attorney-Client Privilege which is probably not applicable to the matters being dealt with. It also specifically relates to third-parties. OSMF members are not third-parties. I can't think of any scenario where it would be in the best interest of the OSMF board to withhold information from it's members. Perhaps someone can give examples of the kinds of legal advice that might fall into this category? Otherwise the suspicion has to be that there's a self-serving interest involved. 80n
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
