@dctoedt As they say IANAL, but more importantly I suspect the project author isn’t a lawyer. The issue isn’t the viability of a standard for simplifying legal

@dctoedt As they say IANAL, but more importantly I suspect the project author isn’t a lawyer. The issue isn’t the viability of a standard for simplifying legal documents (insert overused XKCD standards comic), its the viability of a standard for simplifying legal documents that was designed by non-experts. That said, I’m doubtful a code-book approach like you suggest would result in a net improvement in readability of existing licenses (which I think is the goal), particularly in an era when AI-driven contract analysis engines are starting to be able to read and summarize legal documents for informing normal people on the document’s meaning as well as experienced lawyers. My guess is in 2-3 years something like google translate will actually be able to do a better job of achieving these license readability goals than any of the human-authored approaches in discussion here.