Scripsit Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cf. the pine/UW attack which interpreted "right to modify and > > distribute" as: You have the right to modify. You have the right to > > distribute. You *don't* have the right to do both at once.
> So, you're saying that "and" on its own doesn't allow both at once. It > must be an XAND :-) No, I'm saying that "and" in this position is ambguous. "And/or" is not. > > This is exactly what the "and/or" wording seeks to defuse. > But fails absolutely to do so ... Rubbish. -- Henning Makholm "... and that Greek, Thucydides"
