[WikiEN-l] Text of proposed updated copyright notice

[Steve Vertigum]

--- Axel Boldt <axelboldt at yahoo.com> wrote:
>    "[...] you further affirm that such text is not
> defamatory or in
>     violation of any law; [...]"
> 
> I strongly object to this language. I do not feel a
> moral 
> obligation to be bound by all laws, not even by all 
> laws I happen to know about or that apply to me.
> Also, 
> I am not capable to decide whether a given piece of 
> text violates any law, not even those laws I happen 
> to know about or that apply to me. I however do 
> feel a moral obligation to be honest, which would
> therefore
> preclude me from affirming the above.

It would be nice if the lawyers would make it clear
that the legalese is not so much designed to restrict
our humanity as it is to restrict the scope and
severity of potential lawsuits.

It would be nice if they could make that clear, but it
would seem that they cant explicity stipulate that
such legalese should rightly be taken with a big
[[grain of salt]]--- so thus the rest of us are left
to babble in plain English such layman distinctions,
and never actully bridging the gap--with the exception
of the use of arcane smoke signals and an occasional
Navaho codeword.

~S~
 "My religion consists of a humble admiration of the
illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the
slight details we are able to perceive with our frail
and feeble mind." - Albert Einstein 
 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com