Subject: Re: Fighting license proliferation at its core: Mighty and Beastie Licenses
From: Chris Zumbrunn <chris@czv.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 19:30:00 +0200

On Sep 12, 2005, at 7:03 PM, David Barrett wrote:

> On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 7:14 am, Chris Zumbrunn wrote:
>>
>> Assuming a license would be drafted well, is it true that "verbose" 
>> means "better for the courts"? The argument in favor of non-verbose 
>> licenses would be that they allow the courts to interpret the license 
>> the way it was intended, as appropriate for the given jurisdiction, 
>> and that non-verbose licenses are less troublesome regarding the 
>> translation to other languages.
>
> By "verbose" do you mean:
> - long,
> - extremely precise, and/or
> - complicated (to the layman)
> I think we can all agree that a license should be no longer nor 
> complicated than absolutely necessary.  But it seems the question is 
> whether "extremely precise" is "absolutely necessary".

Yes, with "well drafted" and "verbose" I meant "precise".

Chris