On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 02:19:00PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I was under the impression that almost all software licenses, the GPL > included, divorce themselves for any accountability of damages that the > software does. It has been awhile since I've read a MS software license > but I thought that they did the same.
"accountability of damages that the software does" is something completely different than "being accountable for being sure things work" (a.k.a. "being supported", at least that how I read it, as a non-natively English speaking person). > Am I totally off here? You are right, but I think it is not really related to what was said earlier in this thread... -- -- Jos Vos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- X/OS Experts in Open Systems BV | Phone: +31 20 6938364 -- Amsterdam, The Netherlands | Fax: +31 20 6948204 _______________________________________________ rhelv5-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list
