Re: Squeak in Debian?
Roland Stigge <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 2004-04-24 at 01:10, Walter Landry wrote:
> > > I don't think that the indemnification clause is a problem at all
> > > (otherwise I would have written it in my original report). In the case
> > > described by the clause 5, we could refer Apple (or whoever) to the
> > > clauses 3 and 4 (about disclaimer of warranty and limited liability).
> > If Apple put in code they don't own and Debian distributed it, then
> > clause 5 means that when the people sue Apple for that distribution,
> > Debian has to pay for Apple's defense. Normally, Debian would only
> > pay for Debian's defense.
> Right, thanks. Then, the problem can be reduced to identifying the parts
> in question and removing, replacing or DFSG-free licensing them. If
> that's not feasible, Squeak seems to be clearly non-free.
The lawsuit may be completely bogus. The distributors are still
obligated to defend Apple. I would say that being required to defend
a company that may be on the other side of the world against frivolous
lawsuits goes a little too far. A business or person can evaluate the
local laws and decide whether they want to assume the liability
associated with distributing free software. I think it is too much to
ask for them to worry about laws in other jurisdictions.