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.
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.