[sudont]

Agreed. Flowcharts also assume that there is some sort of decision hierarchy that will be followed. Who's to say that derivative works are the most important thing here? Maybe some company/person needs to cover their ass in another way first.

This list is less a description and more a taxonomy, which means that it's not valuable to anyone new to these licenses. When starting a project, it's best to convey the benefits of each license in a straightforward manner to whoever the decision maker is. A tree like this will only confuse and ensure that an ill-fitting license is chosen from the onset.

Simple, written definitions are therefore best, and are similar to the article here: http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPL

[scythe]

This would matter if there were more than 12 licenses. As it stands, it takes less than a minute to look at every possibility on the chart.

[beza1e1]

Well, the chart does not include much. For example, i found the ISC licence now. It seems to be equivalent to MIT, but has simpler text.

http://www.isc.org/software/license