John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Back in summer 2006, there was a thread regarding the inclusion of Sun's > Java under the DLJ in Debian's non-free area on its FTP site. > > Questions about the license were raised at that time. In my > then-capacity as president of SPI, I asked SPI's attorney to give advice > on the questions. For various reasons, we just recently have the > answers back. > > Current DPL Anthony Towns and SPI President Bdale Garbee have asked me > to summarize the situation here. SPI's attorney has asked that his > messages not be posted to public mailing lists for reasons of > attorney-client privilege. > > The short answer is that there should not be a legal liability on SPI > from this action. Due to the indemnification clause in the Sun license, > there is a possibility -- though it is remote -- of legal liability on > some or all Debian developers. Just whom such theoritical liability > would rest upon depends on whether the ftpmasters are acting on their > own behalf or on that of the organization, which is unclear > legally-speaking at the present moment.
Does this potential liability include mirror operators? Also, I presume that you don't really mean *all* Debian developers. I do not see how it could extend beyond the ftpmasters, the DPL, the package maintainers, and perhaps some other officials in Debian. > This particular issue does not appear to be serious, given the > particulars of the license in question Could you clarify this? Did the lawyer elaborate on this, or just give a general statement? Cheers, Walter Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
