On 04/26/15 20:24, rysiek wrote:
> Problem is -- and this very discussion shows it *very* well -- that even with 
> such restrictive license put on "works of opinion" (I do not subscribe to the 
> view that this distinction is relevant, but let's work with that), views 
> *are* 
> misunderstood.
>
> So, the license does not fix this problem, at all.
>
The impetus of the license isn't to increase understanding or decrease 
misunderstanding amongst readers of a work of opinion, but to stop the 
distribution of misrepresenting derivative works. I can't follow you when you 
start from a false predicate.

-- 

Attachment: 0xE1A91299.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to