[cc-licenses] Typographical glitch?
diane at creativecommons.org
Mon Apr 9 22:23:22 EDT 2012
I corresponded with Francesco offline regarding the note to the list (now
posted, below) about the references to "TK" in 5(c). These weren't errors
or glitches, but intentionally left unidentified and "to come" until
sections and terms were more settled. We should have noted this in the
draft itself, and have now updated those on the wiki [
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/4.0_Drafts] to reflect that.
Francesco correctly pointed out in our exchange that what sections survive
termination could be of interest to those on this list. We will post that
to the list and update the termination section on the 4.0 wiki (
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Francesco Poli <invernomuto at paranoici.org>
To: cc-licenses <cc-licenses at lists.ibiblio.org>
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 20:36:40 +0200
Subject: Typographical glitch?
Am I the only one who sees references to fake sections "TK" in
the CC-by-nc-sa-v4.0draft1 PDF file?
I see them in Section 5(c):
> (c) Sections TK, TK and TK survive termination of this Public License.
Are they due to a typographical glitch?
Or do they mean something? "To Come", maybe?
New GnuPG key, see the transition document!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the cc-licenses