On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 12:03 AM, Russ Nelson <nel...@crynwr.com> wrote: > Richard Fairhurst writes: > > [follow-ups should be to legal-talk yadda yadda] > > > > Russ Nelson wrote: > > > What about the people who didn't agree to the CT, but whose data is > > > in the public domain? > > > > See > > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2011-August/006608.html > > et seq. > > I only see two people defending the idea, and a lot more questioning > it, that somehow a PD declaration is legally any less binding than > signing a contract. The first is a contract of adhesion: "Here's my > work; I renounce any copyright claims over it."
This is incorrect. A waiver is not a contract, let alone a contract of adhesion. (I think maybe you meant a "unilateral contract" rather than a "contract of adhesion", but a waiver isn't one of those either.) The CT is a contract of adhesion. The rest of your message continues to repeat this mistaken premise. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk