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

Re: ISDA CDS Standard Model Public Licence v0.1

Walter Landry a écrit :

Also, I wonder about the wording that they require.  The phrasing
makes it seems that the developers of the application collaborated
with Markit Group Ltd.  What if that is not the case.  What if the
application is written by a competitor?

Wouldn't bet my hand on this one, but it seems fairly reasonable to presume that software distributed on Markit's website, with a licence mentioning Markit explicitely, proposing a standard model software for use with the products that they are world-wide known to market... would be software written by Markit.

Again, it's basically saying "you are responsible for your own
actions. We provided this stuff with no warranty (if it breaks you get
to keep both pieces)". So I personally don't see the difference
between this and a "no warranty" clause.

Um, no.  A no warranty clause is saying "Don't sue me".
Indemnification is saying "If someone else sues me, then you pay for
the lawyers and damages."

True. At the same time, given the financial context, they'd rather take gloves with these kind of things.

It's a question I'll ask them if I find the time for it.

Every time I give the software to someone, I have to make a reasonable
effort to ensure that recipients agree to the license.  I can not just
put the code up on my website.  I have to hide it behind a form so
people can click "I agree".  It is a giant pain in the arse, and
something no other package in main requires.

Sure. A "practical" issue. Not an "ideological" one.

Walter Landry

     Guillaume Yziquel

Reply to: