[Foundation-l] RfC: License update proposal

[Thomas Dalton]

2009/1/22 Chad <innocentkiller at gmail.com>:
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com>wrote:
>> It all boils down to how you define "reasonable", and that's usually
>> left to laymen, not lawyers.
>>
>
> Which is why I for one say shame on CC for using such crappy
> phrasing. Essentially they're saying "require attribution, but what
> form that attribution comes in is what author(s) deem to be
> reasonable."

It's what a jury deems reasonable, rather than the author(s), isn't it?