On 12 May 2009, at 03:17, Peter Miller wrote: > > I have just concluded an email discussion with Jordan following our > lawyers review of 1.0 who has answered some points but is now saying > that he would need someone to pay him to answer more of them which > leaves things in a rather unsatisfactory state given that I am not > prepared to pay two lawyers to talk to each other! We have not had any > response to the review from the OSMF council to date.
Just to clarify, Peter, I spent some time this past Autumn reviewing the comments from your lawyer, for free, and sent to you privately. This spring, I've been focused on the new drafts of the ODbL / DbCL, and had less time to respond to specific comments, including from users who have been kind enough to share their legal advice with the community. As I also made clear in our email exchange, I'm happy to, within my resources, address issues that relate to the Open Data Commons project and not to you, Peter Miller, specifically. CC, for example, doesn't offer the level of detailed advice on use of their licenses on their site that you seek. My offer to meet with your lawyers (for a fee) was based on my opinion that there were several basic elements of open licensing in general, and the ODbL in particular, that your lawyer did not seem to understand. As such, I offered to meet with you and your counsel to go through them so that you both can have a better understanding of the issues present. Thanks again for your understanding. ~Jordan ____ Mr. Jordan S Hatcher, JD, LLM jordan [at] opencontentlawyer dot com More details at: <http://www.jordanhatcher.com> Open Data at: <http://www.opendatacommons.org> _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
