Re: responses to licensing discussion

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Ned Lilly <ned(at)greatbridge(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: responses to licensing discussion
Date: 2000-07-05 16:36:55
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.21.0007050237500.3542-100000@localhost.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Ned Lilly writes:

> With all due respect to the rest of the world, the UCITA provisions in
> Virginia and Maryland, soon to make their way across the rest of the
> US, lead the world in protecting developers from liability - and
> that's our goal.

Considering that you, AFAICT, don't know anything about the laws outside
of the U.S., I'll take that as speculation.

> Without a specified jurisdiction, the aggrieved party can shop around
> for where *he* thinks he has the best shot of screwing you.

That is definitely false.

> The second point, forcing a click-through or some other mechanism
> before a user downloads/installs the software, gets at the same issue.

I'll tell you right now, you might as well forget about that. PostgreSQL
would be laughed out of the building if we did that.

> The recent passage in the US of digital signature legislation affirms
> the various mechanisms by which you can do that.

The PostgreSQL servers are in Canada, thankyouverymuch.

--
Peter Eisentraut Sernanders väg 10:115
peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net 75262 Uppsala
http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message The Hermit Hacker 2000-07-05 16:52:48 Re: responses to licensing discussion
Previous Message Tom Lane 2000-07-05 16:27:57 Re: responses to licensing discussion