You're viewing part of a thread.
Well, if its ok/works for ProPublica, then that’s enough for me.
That's a big "if" on if it works. So wouldn't go around saying it works. Just that someone else is doing it too.
Well, if its ok/works for ProPublica, then that’s enough for me.
That’s a big “if” on if it works. So wouldn’t go around saying it works. Just that someone else is doing it too.
Oh I'm using English properly, in the way I phrased it.
And if they, and their lawyers, believe it works, that's good enough for me.
Did their lawyers really advice them to put it there believing it works?
Did their lawyers really advice them to put it there believing it works?
I wasn't in the room with them, but IMO it would be malpractice of the lawyers if they didn't, so I'm going to assume yes, they did.
It definitely empowers them to go after anyone who uses their content outside of the license.
And it doesn't hurt to have it there. There's nothing wrong with protecting your rights, ever.
Finally, let's not derail the OP post any more than already has been done. If you wish to continue the discussion, it should be done over here...
But you know they advised it?
But you know they advised it?
Are you expecting me to have been in the room with them when they discussed it?
I wasn’t in the room with them
I don't know how you'd know. That's why I'm asking.