Le Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 08:31:52AM +1000, Ben Finney a écrit : > > I assume “how could that happen” there refers to the legal confusion. I > don't pretend to be an expert, but “The Debian project is a major > copyright holder in this work which caused damage to our systems, and > there's no warranty disclaimer” isn't particularly implausible. > > Such a situation would predictably (not inevitably) lead to a court > battle over who caused the damage; even if the Debian project knows that > it's blameless, that could be expensive to prove in a court case.
Hi Ben and Pompee, it would be much more productive if this scenario would be accompanied with some data and facts about which law in which country make the non-warranty disclaimer necessary, exemplified by cases where these laws have successfully been used in court by the plaintiff. In the absence of such an analysis, the discussion is purely about fear, uncertainty and doubt. While it is true that most of the major players in the free software world have opted for having non-warranty disclaimers in their license, I think that we should do our best to base our actions on our understanding, not on the imitation of the others. It is the addition of extra clauses and vague disclaimers that sometimes make licenses non-free (clauses like ‘do not kill people with my software’), so let's resist to temptation of making our license statements longer than what is necessary. Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100629235934.ga6...@kunpuu.plessy.org
