CoC-related termination timeline could be more clear?

[tieguy]

Imagine the following scenario:

1. I receive a notice of CoC violation.
2. I (in good faith) disagree that I violated the CoC, and ask the CoC Committee to evaluate the situation.
3. The CoC Committee is busy, and takes 60 days to evaluate.

During days 31-60, do I have a license to the code?

I think the answer is yes, because I have taken "practical steps to comply" (or at least "practical steps to assert that I already comply"?) But I'm not sure, and I wonder how we could make that more clear.

[kemitchell]

I'd be on the lookout to make sure the patch doesn't leave licensees hanging indefinitely if the committee is slow to respond, or simply ceases to function. Sword of Damocles.

[mwweinberg]

The intention was that the this sentence:

If you do not do so, and the ml5.js Code of Conduct Committee (or its equivalent or successor) agrees that you are in violation of the Code of Conduct, your license ends immediately.

Provided clarity that you had the license until (and unless) the CoC Committee affirmed the violation. Ideally that results in a fail safe behavior towards keeping the license. How can we make that more clear?