> most likely they screwed up the phrasing but meant something extremely more limited
I'm a pretty firm believer in Hanlon's razor ("never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"), except when it comes to lawyers. They tend to put a lot of thought into what they write, and understand the ramifications of their words.
Comments
> most likely they screwed up the phrasing but meant something extremely more limited
I'm a pretty firm believer in Hanlon's razor ("never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"), except when it comes to lawyers. They tend to put a lot of thought into what they write, and understand the ramifications of their words.
Particularly the words "transferable" and "sub-licensable".
I'm particularly impressed by their abstinence from clauses such as "your soul is ours for all eternity".