On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 10:39 AM, Richard Fairhurst <rich...@systemed.net> wrote: > Rather, as Francis pointed out: "A mistake? Someone infelicitously drafting > the licence? It does happen you know :-)." > > Or, as ever with OSM, never attribute to conspiracy that which can be > adequately explained by cock-up.
The whole thing is a mistake, but I find it hard to believe that the wording of the license was an accident. The fact that it got re-added in 1.2 was probably an accident, but the appearance of it in 0.9? How could it be an accident? _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
