Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 4407834" data-attributes="member: 42582">Clark said he wants changes or clarifications. You asserted that clarifications would not be enough, and that &quot;he'd want some changes, and not just clarifications, before he'd sign the License.&quot;Given that Clark himself said clarifications might be enough (presumably depending on what they were), I wondered why you thought that he would in fact only be satisfied with changes.I'm not that fussed by your opinion of the OGL. I wanted to know why you thought that Clark would want changes, given that he said that clarification might be enough. In particular, I was wondering what legal issue you thought he had missed in suggesting that clarification might be enough. I also answered your question as to which terms I thought he wanted clarified, and gave some legal reasons as to why I think those clarifications could well be enough.Legal expertise is relevant to the question of whether or not my legal reasons are any good. It's also relevant to the question of whether Clark is wrong to think that the right sort of clarifications might be adequate. Hence my question about it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 4407834, member: 42582"] Clark said he wants changes [I]or[/I] clarifications. You asserted that clarifications would not be enough, and that "he'd want some changes, and not just clarifications, before he'd sign the License." Given that Clark himself said clarifications might be enough (presumably depending on what they were), I wondered why you thought that he would in fact only be satisfied with changes. I'm not that fussed by your opinion of the OGL. I wanted to know why you thought that [I]Clark[/I] would want changes, given that he said that clarification might be enough. In particular, I was wondering what legal issue you thought he had missed in suggesting that clarification might be enough. I also answered your question as to which terms I thought he wanted clarified, and gave some legal reasons as to why I think those clarifications could well be enough. Legal expertise [i]is[/i] relevant to the question of whether or not my legal reasons are any good. It's also relevant to the question of whether Clark is wrong to think that the right sort of clarifications might be adequate. Hence my question about it. [/QUOTE]

Verification