[License-review] Non-binding straw poll: Do you think CC0 should be approved?
cboettig at gmail.com
Sat Mar 3 00:18:56 UTC 2012
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Alexander Terekhov <
alexander.terekhov at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 7:21 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
> License-review mailing list
> License-review at opensource.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the License-review