| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Gilles DAROLD <gilles(at)darold(dot)net>, PostgreSQL GENERAL <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: responses to licensing discussion |
| Date: | 2000-07-06 16:13:22 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.21.0007060336210.347-100000@localhost.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
The Hermit Hacker writes:
> Personally, I'd like the whole thing weeded down to ... get rid of the
> 'juristiction of ...' (which nobody outside of the US will agree to, from
> what I've been seeing on the list) ... and get rid of "Any person who
> contributes ..." paragraph, which several ppl have voiced a concern about,
> and we might have something that non-US developers can agree to ...
>
> can someone also explain to me what ", NEED, OR QUALITY, AND ANY IMPLIED
> WARRANTY FROM COURSE OF DEALING OR USAGE OF TRADE. IN ADDITION, THERE IS
> NO IMPLIED WARRANTY AGAINST INTERFERENCE WITH ENJOYMENT OR AGAINST
> INFRINGEMENT." is supposed to mean? what the hell is "INTERFERENCE WITH
> ENJOYMENT OR AGAINST INFRINGEMENT"?
It means if you don't enjoy it, you can't sue. :-)
I don't see any point for not using the same BOLD (or the same text, for
that matter) that the UCB used, as has been suggested a hundred times
before. We'd make the extra point of "Licenses are so stupid, they make us
write this twice."
--
Peter Eisentraut Sernanders väg 10:115
peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net 75262 Uppsala
http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | The Hermit Hacker | 2000-07-06 16:19:09 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: Revised Copyright: is this more palatable? |
| Previous Message | Karel Zak | 2000-07-06 16:06:27 | Re: Find all the dates in the calendar week? |