> Not that I think that anyone owning both a law degree and a computer > in 2007 should legitimately be able to plead innocence here. FAST > Australia's lawyers are making themselves look like idiots, and the > same for every other company tacking on such notices. I think the > real bottom line here is "we don't accept patches from idiots".
Well the problem is, it isn't the guy that sent the patch that is the idiot. That guys has zero control over the matter, the signature is going to be tacked on at the MTA level. I talked to my attorneys about this problem (not specific to postgresql but in general) because my CPAs also have the same type of notice. My attorney's response was that it is all about disclosure and covering your butt. Not ours, but theirs. The idea being that they can say, "Look we sent out the confidential disclosure, it isn't our fault the recipients didn't listen." Of course the joke here is, that the email went out on a public list and is now mirrored all over the world and harvested by every spammer on the planet ;) However, it may be a good idea to have our (SPI) attorney at least give us an official word on the matter. Thoughts? Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake > > regards, tom lane > -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq