Luis Villa wrote on 1 September:
On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 5:02 PM, Bradley M. Kuhn
> Fontana notes that it might be possible that the acceptance clause is
> doing something different entirely unrelated to bringing forth a
> contract claim.
Is the question to the list basically "is there anything else it
I don't think I meant to ask a question: I was focused on making sure
Fontana and I had properly obeyed HBR. :)
But, it's a good question nonetheless. Does an acceptance clause give
us the contractual claim "magically"? If not, what's it doing there?
Just reminding people they have no other license other than the copyleft
one? And, if the latter, then since the goal of copyleft-next is to be
short, reminders are clearly "right out".
But I'd really really love to see someone who is supportive of copyleft
to dive deeply into case law about acceptance clauses and post a summary
I think there is some value to it for non-lawyers; i.e., helping
understand that this is how they get the right to use the material.
But that's the only thing I can think of, and it's a stretch.
Indeed, and it's therefore truly informational and belongs in an FAQ,
not in the license, given Fontana's goal of brevity.