You also irrevocably waive any “moral rights” or other rights with respect to attribution of authorship or integrity of materials for Your Content. When we make public use of Your Content, we will, where practical, use good faith efforts to credit you as the original author of Your Content.
Wait your terms say you are allowed to delete my name from my posts and use my content without attribution. Why? And is this new or old? Where can I read change history of the terms or something like that? The good faith thing seems basically nonbinding/meaningless legally, and also doesn’t apply whenever you decide it’s impractical or you’re doing something privately.
Why do you want people to waive moral rights? I saw the same thing in Less Wrong’s terms today but did not find any explanation of the upside.
Hi Elliot, your quote cuts off the “Subject to section 2.2” qualifier, which is the section that discusses the Creative Commons license.
We’ve tried to give a simple summary of the license in this post, but I might suggest talking to a lawyer if you have questions about legal terms; for example “good faith” is not meaningless legally, it is a well defined term of art.
You want me to talk to a lawyer to know how quotes and your new CC BY stuff works? (E.g. if I quote from my own article while link posting it, possibly the entire thing, does that keep anything quoted out of CC BY?) You aren’t willing to clarify that yourselves and just want individuals to go pay lawyers to find out how your forum works? That seems very unreasonable.
Also
Subject to Section 2.2, [a bunch of stuff]. You also irrevocably waive any “moral rights”
That qualifier doesn’t appear to apply to the moral right waiving.
https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/termsOfUse
Wait your terms say you are allowed to delete my name from my posts and use my content without attribution. Why? And is this new or old? Where can I read change history of the terms or something like that? The good faith thing seems basically nonbinding/meaningless legally, and also doesn’t apply whenever you decide it’s impractical or you’re doing something privately.
Why do you want people to waive moral rights? I saw the same thing in Less Wrong’s terms today but did not find any explanation of the upside.
Hi Elliot, your quote cuts off the “Subject to section 2.2” qualifier, which is the section that discusses the Creative Commons license.
We’ve tried to give a simple summary of the license in this post, but I might suggest talking to a lawyer if you have questions about legal terms; for example “good faith” is not meaningless legally, it is a well defined term of art.
You want me to talk to a lawyer to know how quotes and your new CC BY stuff works? (E.g. if I quote from my own article while link posting it, possibly the entire thing, does that keep anything quoted out of CC BY?) You aren’t willing to clarify that yourselves and just want individuals to go pay lawyers to find out how your forum works? That seems very unreasonable.
Also
That qualifier doesn’t appear to apply to the moral right waiving.