MJ Ray wrote: > Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Where's the cc-nl lead's explanation? It's something. > > http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2006-August/003876.html > > Hope that helps,
It really does help a lot. "in any case i do not think (and that judgment was shared by a number of other project leads) that these fringe scenarios are a good reason to make the licenses more complicated" The main motivation was to prevent license complication, *not* to prohibit parallel distribution. This is emphasized quite clearly in that message. Therefore I conclude that we can interpret that CC3.0 draft means what it says and parallel distribution is OK. -- Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it. So why isn't he in prison yet?... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
