Re: New idea for finessing patent issues (was: lame (again!))
> From: Richard Braakman <dark@xs4all.nl>
>
> I could support this proposal if it simply pops up a screen that says
> "These corporations claim to hold patents on [part of] this package's
> functionality. [list of patent numbers, countries, expiration dates,
> short descriptions, links to more information]".
>
> Then the user is informed of a potential problem, and can make up his
> or her own mind and take any measures necessary. At the same time,
> Debian has fulfilled its potential obligation to inform the user, yet
> does not take a stance about the validity of the patent.
That sounds very reasonable to me.
> From: Jeffry Smith <smith@mclinux.com>
> ...
> I dispute (note: IANAL) they have legal weight! Click-through's
> suffer from the problem of no way to ensure they ARE a contract.
> Only under UCITA (ack) can they be guaranteed to have force
> (assuming UCITA is upheld).
I agree. And UCITA is an abomination.
Fortunately we're not actually talking about a *contract* here, just a
warning. "Be aware, some people claim that there might be a patent
issue in some uses of this software (patents US7549857398573498,
US84973549753987538, and US2153987543895473). Use it at your own
risk. No warranty expressed or implied. You're own your own, son."
We're not asking them to agree to anything at all, just making them
aware that Debian isn't agreeing to anything or giving any assurances
either. Like the GPL's recommended:
Gnomovision comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY; for details type `show w'.
Reply to: