>>>>> On 10 Jul 2000 13:06:40 +0200, Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Henning> Scripsit James LewisMoss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> The main sentence of this section is "Recipient shall be solely >> responsible for damages arising, directly or indirectly, out of >> its utilization of rights under this License." The sentence you >> are harping on is a clarification of this sentence. Henning> Well, that's a possible reasoning, but how can you be sure Henning> that the second sentence is not just another, independently Henning> valid, rule? I can't of course, but I expect it'd be written as two items if it were intended to be. Jim -- @James LewisMoss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Blessed Be! @ http://jimdres.home.mindspring.com | Linux is kewl! @"Argue for your limitations and sure enough, they're yours." Bach
