[License-discuss] Shortest copyleft licence

[Rick Moen]

Quoting David Woolley (forums at david-woolley.me.uk):

> It means he may think that the licence is preventing the sort of
> commercial exploitation he doesn't like, but the commercial
> exploiter will ignore the words he is relying on and instead exploit
> based on their attempt to re-interpet the letter of the formal
> licence.

Nigel should and can speak for himself, but I suspect preventing 
twisty people from imagining they've found subverting dodges, 
believed defensible in court, is simply outside the scope of what any
'human language' licence summary can or should reasonably aim to
achieve.

(It _is_ outside the scope of CC's aims, seems to me.)

Which was my point in my prior thread, and I could swear it was pretty
clear the first time, albeit I don't mind stating it twice.  (Twice is
plenty; stepping back now.)