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

Re: Conflicting license for Adeona?

"Arnoud Engelfriet" <arnoud@engelfriet.net> wrote in message [🔎] 20080725075110.GA99968@stack.nl">news:[🔎] 20080725075110.GA99968@stack.nl...
Ben Finney wrote:
I don't think "is intended for [use Foo, Bar, Baz] only" is a
restriction upon the recipient. It states the *intent*, but isn't
phrased as a condition or restriction on what the recipient actually
may do.

I agree. My reading is that this is a warning of some kind. If you use
this for commercial purposes, it's at your own risk. Something like that.


I'm not sure though. The listing of an e-mail adress for licensing information in the "TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR USE" section makes it sound like they think usage is a licenseable right independent of the other rights. In that case, they may belive that uses other than the intended uses are forbidden by default, and a license is nessisary for those purposes.

It is rather common for Universities' legal departments to have unusual theories about copyright law. Some universities belive that they have the rights to all work created by any of its students, even those not in any employment relationship with the University, and despite the lack of such terms in any contracts the students have signed. I'm pretty sure that is a near laughable belief, but some universities do belive that. As such, I would recommend cation when dealing with software from a univeristy.

So recieving a clarification would be quite desirable.


However, I do agree that they may just be trying to warn that the program was not designed with certain uses in mind (such as law enforcement use) and thus might be unsuitable for such purposes.

Reply to: