Re: OpenCascade license opinion
John Halton wrote:
> It's like saying, "Someone who has the right to park their car in this
> parking space has the right to drive their car onto that parking
> space".
Now I see what you mean. Fair point, I'll have to be a little more
nuanced in my responses here.
I've never seen cases or commentary on this point either. I suppose
it wouldn't be worth the lawsuit. Even if my interpretation were to
prevail, all it gets someone is the right to execute the software
on the one computer he downloaded the work to.
> > The practical difference is that the GPL introduces several additional
> > terms that I have to agree with. The exclusion of liability, for one.
>
> Fair point. Though if the GPL is non-contractual (or if it is a
> contract that a user can decline to accept) then it's difficult to see
> what liability the licensor would have anyway. The "no warranty"
> provision in the GPL is as much a statement of fact (in most cases) as
> anything else.
True. In business-to-consumer transactions the question if you can
waive liability (and if so, how much) is a big one. It could thus
theoretically become relevant if the consumer accepted a waiver at all.
Arnoud
--
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch & European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
Arnoud blogt nu ook: http://blog.iusmentis.com/
Reply to: