4 ms·
Then why do you have to agree to Google before contributing compared to Mozilla's, where you can contribute right away? As to "may", you're incorrect. I'm imp
by iooi 9y ago
Then why do you have to agree to Google before contributing compared to Mozilla's, where you can contribute right away?
As to "may", you're incorrect. I'm implying that they should have used stronger language, as in "should" or "will", since otherwise the data contributed to this project may not be made public.
- ocdtrekkie 9y agoTo be fair here, Google is much more likely to get sued, it's not surprisingly they want to be more clear on consent to terms.
- danso 9y agoMozilla is a large enough of an organization to have the resources and wisdom to not depend on “Most people won’t even notice” when it comes to legal issues.
- ocdtrekkie 9y agoOh, I'm sure a lawyer was involved for both, but different lawyers in different situations are going to have different opinions.
- jsgo 9y agoWhile it is probably hard to understand, the other poster's interpretation is legit as it is referencing an acknowledgement of rights. Without such language, you could provide your voice to this and then when they release, you could say "hang on, I never agreed to give you permission to release this to the public, use for your own purposes, etc." As far as "may" vs "should"/"will", that'd be very unlikely for them to put into the terms: what happens if they decide tomorrow to abandon the project and just leverage a different data set? They'd now be beholden to release something.
- carussell 9y agoIt's clear that you're arguing at this point just to argue. There's no reason to even respond.