[License-discuss] [License-review] CC withdrawl of CC0 from OSI process

[David Woolley]

Rick Moen wrote:

> It's called 'realism'.   The reason well written licences have an
> irreducible complexity about them is that they are obliged to deal with
> real legal issues, e.g., the way warranty disclaimers are required to be

The reality is that the people who have to comply with licences are not 
professional lawyers.  If they are presented with lots of legalese, they 
are likely to ignore it, as most people do with shrink wrap licence 
agreements, or the legal stuff hidden in low contrast, small font links 
at the bottom of web pages, which the designers would rather not have 
there at all.

I suspect that licences with lots of legalese discriminate against 
medium size enterprises.  Very small ones, and individuals, are not 
worth suing, and very big one have bigger lawyers than yours.  The 
medium sized enterprise is not going to want to bring in a lawyer every 
time a design specification is reviewed, so, if their management cannot 
understand the licence, they may just play safe by looking for different 
solutions.


-- 
David Woolley
Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want.
RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam,
that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.