I doubt such rule would work in US courts as the legal tradition there put emphasis on exact wordings and would look for precedents which could direct the court into an interpretation.<p>The courts where I live (Sweden) would look more into what the author intended rather than the exact wording, so it will accepts much lesser precise wording than other systems. The downside is that you are basically asking what one judge and 3 politicians (lowest court instance) think is the authors intention, common sense in this context, and if the distributor acted with malice or not.