imported from 2499
I would like raise an issue here, many sites dont have a TOS directly they
use creative commons copyleft or another form of copyleft.
The argument is that this is not a contract you agree with, but a license
you accept if you exercise it and create derived works.
It is not a contract because you have no agreement between parties.
"The GPL was designed as a license ,
rather than a contract"
We had a discussion on twitter here
https://twitter.com/ToSDR/status/248378535142641664 and I would like to
continue it in a better format.
my point is that copyleft gives you greater freedom, for example to share
data from many sources with no contract with them. you can collect these
when you then introduce Contributor terms with the right to change the
license in the future such as osmf has done, the entire copyleft breaks
down because a third party cannot agree to the those terms. This is the
different between a contributors agreement / contract and a copyleft
www.tos-dr.info // www.twitter.com/tosdr // www.github.com/Unhosted/ToS-DR
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Terms of Service; Didn't Read" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to email@example.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tosdr?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
imported status as declined
Previous Title: No changes recorded
Updated Title: No changes recorded
Previous Analysis: No changes recorded
Updated Analysis: No changes recorded
Previous Status: PENDING
Updated Status: DECLINED
Updated Title: Creative Commons as a TOS
Updated Analysis: Creative Commons as a TOS
Updated Status: PENDING