Dave F. writes: > On 06/12/2010 09:55, Frederik Ramm wrote: > > > > The situation is sufficient for me to use Bing imagery for tracing. > > I'm not looking at the legal side of it, I'm just looking at the size > > of the PR disaster should Microsoft attempt to backtrack in any way. > > > > PR is more important than legal. > > I'm just catching up with this thread & can't believe what I've just > read. You bleat & whinge about people talking legal in other threads & > yet here, in legal, you admit that your advice to others that's it's OK > to trace Bing (under any license) has no foundation other than a guess & > a feeling. > > I'm looking for concrete evidence & it would be better if you kept quiet > until you had some
The USA has a legal principle that says "If Alice says ``Y'all have permission to do this'', Bill goes ahead and does it, then Alice has no recourse other than to withdraw permission." Specifically for licenses, it's called "Reliance". And if Alice has said "Y'all can do this forever," guess what? She has given up her ability to withdraw permission. So, by Reliance, Microsoft *could* tell us to stop, but they can't retroactively withdraw the permission they gave us in the past. Since Microsoft is a United States company, they need to abide by U.S. law. The real question here is: whether Microsoft believes that a posting on the official Bing blog is usable in court. -- --my blog is at http://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
