On 20/07/07, Erik Moeller <erik(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
On 7/20/07, Robin Schwab
<contact(a)robinschwab.ch> wrote:
> We have seen many opinions now. The case is
legally complex. What I miss is a
> binding vote probably by the Wikimedia Foundation on this issue.
All the lawyers consulted have unanimously said that
CC 3.0 is legally
safe for us to use. IMHO there's no reason for any scare warnings or
removal from the selector, only for a clarification of the legal
terminology used in accordance with the statements made on this list.
If the licence is a free content licence, it's a free content licence.
Though we should have a CC 3.0 page, linking to the clarification from
CC and the internal legal opinion from Mike, noting that some (e.g.
me!) have been confused by the wording, and that CC notes that
clarification would be good, but that all relevant parties who are
legal professionals agree it's legally clear.
- d.