[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Fw: [argouml-dev] Licence issue (debian in particular)

On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 12:37:42PM +0200, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Glenn Maynard <g_deb@zewt.org>
> > On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 09:33:50AM +0200, Arnaud Vandyck wrote:
> > > * You acknowledge that Software is not designed, licensed or intended for
> > > * use in the design, construction, operation or maintenance of any nuclear
> > > * facility.
> > This seems to fail DFSG#6: No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor.
> Im my reading, it is just a peculiarly written warranty disclaimer
> ... hm, oops, no, the word "licensed" seems definitely out of place
> here. Wonder what they mean by that, but I agree that we should not
> consider it as free until we get clarification from the licensor.

Given what I've read of Sun's (and Microsoft's) normal disclaimers, yes,
this is more or less a warranty disclaimer, but with stronger teeth
(or it usually has stronger wording), because of the inability in some
jurisdictions to disclaim all responsiblity.

Or, in other words, it may well fail DFSG #6, because the upstream is very
likely to be completely unwilling to open themselves up to the lawsuits
that could result from a critical failure of their software when used in
a safety-critical system where a failure could wreak havoc over a large
geographical area.

(Similar notices are often seen for life-critical systems such as medical,
military support, or other similar stuff).

They *might* be willing to drop 'licensed', however, as that seems to be an
artifact from the standard boilerplate of "you have a license to use this"
non-Free stuff they produce. We can hope.
Joel Baker <fenton@debian.org>

Attachment: pgp8wTANbYla4.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: