> That is not unlimited liability. That clause says that if you > contribute code which you do not own to the FSF, and the correct owner > of the code sues the FSF, and wins the court case, and the FSF is > forced to pay damages to the true owner, then you are legally > responsible to cover the FSF's costs, both the costs of damages and > the cost of litigation.
Yes, but there is no limit to the "costs of damages and the cost of litigation". THAT'S the concern being expressed. > So, if you screw up badly, there is liability, yes. To me, that's the point. This clause only operates if the person doing the assignment did something improper. HOWEVER, there IS a legitimate issue: suppose an employee develops a patch and submits it to the FSF. Unknown to the company, the employee actually stole the code from a third party. But it's the COMPANY that's indemnifying the FSF. Yes, it can sue its employee and get a judgement in the amount it has to pay the FSF, but most likely the employee couldn't pay such a judgement. So you do have a situation here where the company is being forced to trust its employee.