Was thinking about this. Isn't a time/date a version? We can track
revisions on the agreement, and then can track when its shared on the
site, and if one so needs to know when they used the license, they can
refer to the date.
We can pass a date like: http://sharism.org/agreement/20120319
As I said, we should not emphaize these technicalities, should have
the license on the page, I agree, and work to make the agreement
shorter where possible! Ha! Tell that to a lawyer, we are trying to
make sharing easier, and the agreement more concise and shorter!
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 5:16 AM, Mike Linksvayer <email address hidden> wrote:
> Promoting not reading the real agreement is something CC has always been
> criticized for; I wouldn't replicate. The agreement itself should be
> readable. Re shortening the agreement, then you should plan for
> versioning. It isn't cool to change agreement people may have used
> You received this bug notification because you are a bug assignee.
> agreement and fulltext on separate pages suboptimal
> To manage notifications about this bug go to:
Jon Phillips 王✳爻气 http://fabricatorz.com ✳ skype: kidproto ✳ irc: rejon
+1.415.830.3884 (global) ✳ +86-187-1003-9974 (beijing)