[copyleft-next] Fwd: Re: Revised Severability provision following list discussion initiated by tieguy. (5129dea)
Posting GitHub comment to list.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [copyleft-next] Revised Severability provision following
list discussion initiated by tieguy. (5129dea)
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2012 07:26:58 -0800
From: Engelnyst <notifications(a)github.com>
Reply-To: richardfontana/copyleft-next
<reply+c-2367238-b1dbcafcca3643d72129393d43090f804a7b399e-1179636(a)reply.github.com>
To: richardfontana/copyleft-next <copyleft-next(a)noreply.github.com>
CC: Richard Fontana <fontana(a)sharpeleven.org>
FWIW: when I read 'is to be reformed' I asked immediately "by who".
(the entire license, statement of project position, something else?)
The main question I would personally have, here, is: is the statement
of the project, its clarifications, its statement of intended meaning
or limits of applicability, enough to choose between interpretations
of a clause?
I don't have a better suggestion though, and from the diff and mailing
list discussion IMHO it's a better phrase than the former. However if
the intention is to limit the "by who" strictly to courts of law, then
perhaps it would be better to state that somehow...
Obligatory note: IANAL.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/richardfontana/copyleft-next/commit/5129dea218c3a189ac...