A few people have made the rather extraordinary suggestion that the TPV is "OK" because the intent is good, no matter how dreadful its wording. They ignore the fact that what matters in court is the actual wording. It is the *words* that a user must agree to, not the intent.
Faced with the silliness of "intent" as a mitigating factor, perhaps what is needed is an equally silly response: - Let's write a new document that expresses the *intent* of LL's TPV, but written cleanly and without any overreaching clauses. Let's call that new document the *TPV Intended Policy Document*, or *IPD* for short. - Modify the GPL viewer (which you have a license to do without further restrictions, a freedom that was granted to you by LL) in such a way that, on detecting the incoming Linden TPV Policy document, it presents you with the *IPD* instead. Click on the Agree button if you agree with the *intent of the TPV*, and TAKE A SCREEN SHOT OF IT, just in case. - Go back to doing something useful with your time. I hope we don't need to descend to this level of comedy. The TPV should state what is intended, not something totally different. I recommend that we use tomorrow's meeting with Joe to affirm this. Morgaine.
_______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
