> From: Carter Bullard [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Is the OSI trying to make a determination that two
> different legal documents are functionally equivalent?
>
[DJW:] As I understand it, they are determining
whether the licence is a member of the set of
possible "open source" licences.
> The place to define the liabilities and remedies is in the
> license. My companies license has some detail in this area.
>
[DJW:] IANAL, but I believe that it can only be
done in a contract. Many "licenses" are actually
both a licence and a contract, and some of the
arguments about shrink wrapped licences are about
whether a contract actually exists. In English, law
contracts require an offer, acceptance of that offer
and a consideration (something given in return). It
would probably help if "open source" licenses that
attempt to go beyond a statement of permissions
explicitly identified all three components.
[DJW:]
--
--------------------------- DISCLAIMER ---------------------------------
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender,
except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of BTS.
