Re: Option 3

Hi Lachlan,

Your comments are intemperate and inappropriate for public-html, per the Discussion Guidelines:

- Tone of messages must be maintained at the highest level of professionalism; flaming, sarcasm, or personal attacks will not be tolerated.
- Don't attack a person. Disagree with an idea.
- Respect the right of others to disagree.
- Be polite and show respect. If you have nothing new, positive, informative or helpful to say, refrain from sharing it.
- It's inappropriate to repeat the same argument over and over without adding new information.
- Debate; Don't argue.
- Listen; Don't shout.
- Stay on topic.

In particular, if you disagree with somebody's interpretation of the facts, it's needlessly hostile and combative to refer to describe that as "blatant lies". Try to find more polite ways to express yourself.

Please consider this a public warning per the Discussion Guidelines.



On Mar 23, 2011, at 12:25 PM, Lachlan Hunt wrote:

> On 2011-03-23 19:19, Sam Ruby wrote:
>> From the original post[1] "This Option 3 license, however,
>> contains no express restrictions on downstream uses".
> Please stop quoting blatant lies.  It absolutely does contain restrictions.  The W3C Document Licence states:
>  "No right to create modifications or derivatives of W3C documents is
>   granted pursuant to this license."
> That imposes the restrictions.  Option 3 only carves out 3 exceptions for software, supporting materials accompanying software, and documentation of software.
> Downstream users are still restricted from using the material for anything that is either not covered by those 3 exceptions and not otherwise permitted by copyright laws under fair use (or similar) where applicable.
> -- 
> Lachlan Hunt - Opera Software

Received on Wednesday, 23 March 2011 20:39:30 UTC