On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 02:44:07PM +0100, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > Tim Waters (chippy) wrote: > >> Going back to the newly uploaded draft [1]. Maybe it's me, maybe it's >> the legal speak, but where does it explicitly say that if someone >> creates and releases to an unsuspecting public a derived work (paper >> map piddled on by performance artist, say) then they have to also make >> available any derived database that they used to make it with? > > /me starts to laugh hysterically. > > The version on the OSMF site is not the latest one (i.e. the one > containing the work which OSMF paid Jordan for).
I asked for the _current_ draft and got told it would be on the site shortly. Mike responded saying he had put it on the site. I was curious about the timestamp in the metadata, I got told this was the draft sent for review. That all sounds true, but I’m still miffed we didn’t just get to see the current draft in the first place (assuming the one posted is current and doesn’t contain random clauses about Richard F owning all your first born, etc; I haven’t read it yet). Simon, not sure why you’d want my first born… -- A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works.—John Gall
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
