[License-review] Non-binding straw poll: Do you think CC0 should be approved?

[Tzeng, Nigel H.]

+1

On 3/2/12 1:21 AM, "Karl Fogel" <kfogel at red-bean.com> wrote:

>The CC0 thread was so enormous that it could sometimes be hard to
>distinguish between the volume and the content behind each point made.
>
>Now, the approval process is not a matter of majority vote, but still
>I'm curious to see how many people felt the 4a objection (or any other
>problem) was serious enough to warrant rejection, and how many would
>approve anyway.  Knowing these ratios would help us determine whether to
>continue investigating, perhaps by bringing in some more legal
>expertise.  (For example, one thing I wanted to do, but didn't have
>time, was bring in the people at the FSF who evaluated CC0 and hear
>their reasoning.)
>
>If you wish to participate in this straw poll, please follow up to this
>mail with "+1" if you think CC0 should be approved, or "-1" *followed by
>the reason* if you don't think it should be approved.
>
>Any -1 that isn't accompanied by a reason I won't count in my tally.
>(+1 responses have an implicit reason -- that the license fallback
>portion of CC0 is OSD-compatible -- so there's no need to state it).
>
>Thanks!
>
>-Karl
>_______________________________________________
>License-review mailing list
>License-review at opensource.org
>http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-review