Re: Free Download End User License Agreement

[bruce@perens.com (Bruce Perens)]

From: Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au>
> In other words, what you said originally is probably wrong:

I'm not communicating my point clearly.

What I wanted to say was that they should be _consistent_ in their application
of the legal-minor issue. If they want to restrict distribution to over-18,
they should not use software contributed by minors because that would be an
inconsistent application of the over-18 principle: ignoring the principle
when it's to their advantage, and restricting when it's neutral or not to
their advantage.

IMO they don't need quite so much CYA language in their license and thus the
legal minor issue is irrelevant. Many other companies their size or larger do
without quite so much CYA, including Canadian companies that contribute to
Debian.

> I have to wonder, though, if it wouldn't be in everyone's best interest
> if we encouraged Corel and anyone else who plans on make a Debian derived
> distribution to subscribe one or two of their lawyers to -legal, and
> run things by us.

I think they are listening but they don't want to talk.
I recently went to hire counsel for my company. I sent out a message on
license-discuss, asking if any real attorneys read the list and would consider
a relationship with me an important part of their business. I got an answer
from an attorney at a top-notch Palo Alto law firm, who admitted to reading
my posts for two years but had never posted _once_ in all of that time as a
lurker. They seem to be put off by liability issues, etc.

	Thanks

	Bruce