Chad writes: > I'm not the one to decide, nor do I have particularly strong feelings > about one method of attribution or another. Just thought I'd lay the > blame for this mess where it belongs: a vaguely worded license > with highly debatable terms.
Without defending the particulars of CC's phrasing, which I think has its problems but which I also think is better than you allow for here, I'll offer my opinion that a license a license without any vagueness or debatable terms is such a rarity that I don't think I've ever seen one. --Mike _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
