On Mon, 22 May 2006 19:13:47 -0700 Russ Allbery wrote:
> Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@gmail.com> writes:
[...]
> > Thie simplest solution in this case would be if Sun simply attached
> > the FAQ as an addendum to the licence rather than stating it's not
> > legally binding.
>
> Yeah. Not disagreeing there.
Mmmh, we would end up with a contradictory license if Sun did this,
because the FAQ seems to be inconsistent with the current license.
Hence, no, I don't think attaching the FAQ to the license would be a
good solution.
The license itself should be rephrased in order to actually say what Sun
meant.
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
......................................................................
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
Attachment:
pgpaIfeGr8Znc.pgp
Description: PGP signature