Re: [freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-devl] JRE License
Mark J. Roberts wrote on 5/1/01 9:42 pm: >Yeah, I know that. I was >commenting on your double >standard, where it's >acceptable for users of your >software to waive their right >to sue you for damages, but >"totally reckless and stupid" >for Sun's users to do the >same. I think the diffrence is Large Corperation vs. small developer. The large corperation can afford to take a few damages, but the small developer cannot. If I'm buying a car from an individual, I expect that the guy won't help me fix it should something go wrong. Maybe if he's a nice guy he'll tell me if he knows something is wrong with the car, and he'll fix it if it acts up, but thats the extent of it. OTOH, if I buy from a dealership, I expect some sort of warrenty. Timm Murray --- Theory is when you know how it works, but fails. Practice is when something works, but you don't know why. Here, Theory and Practice come together. Nothing works, and nobody knows why. ___ Chat mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
Re: [freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-devl] JRE License
If the aim is to make Freenet accessible to a mass audience, then it's well within everyone's interest for the legalities to be sorted out, so that an idiot-proof installation is possible. If legal expertise is lacking, this might be a justifiable use of some of the Freenet slush fund. The more active Freenet nodes in existence, the safer Freenet as a network becomes, and the more content is available for all, and the more the dream of a truly free internet becomes a reality. But I echo others' sentiments in saying you've done a good thing, Bad. Legal vulnerability does need to be kept in check. There's too many powerful individuals and organisations who'd love to see Freenet developers bleeding from their asses holidaying in Club Fed (or Her Majesty's Hotel, etc). - Original Message - From: "Tavin Cole" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 5:52 PM Subject: Re: [freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-devl] JRE License > On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 10:27:30PM -0700, Mr. Bad wrote: > > >>>>> "TC" == Tavin Cole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > TC> However, can we not simply make it a part of _our_ license > > TC> agreement that they agree to indemnify us w/r/to problems > > TC> resulting from the JRE as well as Fred? > > > > That's an interesting point, but it seems like it requires more legal > > brainpower than I have. > > > > Hey, how did this thread get over to chat? Damn. > > Ok, I'm cc'ing this to devl then. > > So we've had lawyer types post on the list before, surely one of them > can help. However why wouldn't be as simple as taking either the Sun > or GPL indemnity clause almost word for word and just substituting > nouns? We get 2 indemnity clauses, one for the JRE and one for Fred. > > -- > > # tavin cole > # > # "The process of scientific discovery is, in effect, > # a continual flight from wonder." > # - Albert Einstein > > > ___ > Chat mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat > ___ Chat mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
Re: [freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-devl] JRE License
On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 10:05:05PM -0700, Mr. Bad wrote:
> > "MJR" == Mark J Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> MJR> Yeah, I know that. I was commenting on your double standard,
> MJR> where it's acceptable for users of your software to waive
> MJR> their right to sue you for damages, but "totally reckless and
> MJR> stupid" for Sun's users to do the same.
>
> The GPL non-warranty says that users can't sue me. It's a repudiation
> of liability, to the extent possible in law. The JRE license says that
> we (collectively) accept liability for problems with the *JRE*, not
> with Fred.
>
> "you agree to defend and indemnify Sun and its licensors from
> and against any damages, costs, liabilities, settlement
> amounts and/or expenses (including attorneys' fees) incurred
> in connection with any claim, lawsuit or action by any third
> party that arises or results from the use or distribution of
> any and all Programs and/or Software."
>
> ("Programs" = our stuff, "Software" = Sun stuff). That means that we
> are responsible if there is any problems with the JRE -- even separate
> from the use of Fred.
However, can we not simply make it a part of _our_ license agreement that
they agree to indemnify us w/r/to problems resulting from the JRE as well
as Fred?
> MJR> Or were you demanding that your users do a reckless and
> MJR> stupid thing?
>
> I demand that they do 6 reckless and stupid things before
> breakfast.
And that constitutes a token we can use to send you freenet email?
--
# tavin cole
#
# "The process of scientific discovery is, in effect,
# a continual flight from wonder."
# - Albert Einstein
___
Chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
Re: [freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-devl] JRE License
On 1 May 2001, Mr.Bad wrote:
> > "MJR" == Mark J Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> MJR> Yeah, I know that. I was commenting on your double standard,
> MJR> where it's acceptable for users of your software to waive
> MJR> their right to sue you for damages, but "totally reckless and
> MJR> stupid" for Sun's users to do the same.
>
> The GPL non-warranty says that users can't sue me. It's a repudiation
> of liability, to the extent possible in law. The JRE license says that
> we (collectively) accept liability for problems with the *JRE*, not
> with Fred.
>
> "you agree to defend and indemnify Sun and its licensors from
> and against any damages, costs, liabilities, settlement
> amounts and/or expenses (including attorneys' fees) incurred
> in connection with any claim, lawsuit or action by any third
> party that arises or results from the use or distribution of
> any and all Programs and/or Software."
>
> ("Programs" = our stuff, "Software" = Sun stuff). That means that we
> are responsible if there is any problems with the JRE -- even separate
> from the use of Fred.
Ah, I see. If I redistribute freenetmirror, and a user sues you, I am not
obligated to defend you. In fact, I can encourage my users to sue you.
Cool.
--
"...you have mistaken your cowardice for common sense
and have found comfort in that, deceiving yourselves."
Mark Roberts | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
Re: [freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-devl] JRE License
On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 10:27:30PM -0700, Mr. Bad wrote: > > "TC" == Tavin Cole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > TC> However, can we not simply make it a part of _our_ license > TC> agreement that they agree to indemnify us w/r/to problems > TC> resulting from the JRE as well as Fred? > > That's an interesting point, but it seems like it requires more legal > brainpower than I have. > > Hey, how did this thread get over to chat? Damn. Ok, I'm cc'ing this to devl then. So we've had lawyer types post on the list before, surely one of them can help. However why wouldn't be as simple as taking either the Sun or GPL indemnity clause almost word for word and just substituting nouns? We get 2 indemnity clauses, one for the JRE and one for Fred. -- # tavin cole # # "The process of scientific discovery is, in effect, # a continual flight from wonder." # - Albert Einstein ___ Chat mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
Re: [freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-devl] JRE License
> "MJR" == Mark J Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: MJR> Ah, I see. If I redistribute freenetmirror, and a user sues MJR> you, I am not obligated to defend you. In fact, I can MJR> encourage my users to sue you. Cool. Right. But by using freenetmirror, the user has agreed that they understand that the software sucks, it doesn't work, and it may well cause their monitor to explode and embed chunks of glass and phosphor in their eyeballs. ~Mr. Bad -- ~ Mr. Bad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Pigdog Journal | http://pigdog.org/ freenet:MSK@SSK@u1AntQcZ81Y4c2tJKd1M87cZvPoQAge/pigdog+journal// "Statements like this give the impression that this article was written by a madman in a drug induced rage" -- Ben Franklin ~ ___ Chat mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
Re: [freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-devl] JRE License
> "TC" == Tavin Cole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: TC> However, can we not simply make it a part of _our_ license TC> agreement that they agree to indemnify us w/r/to problems TC> resulting from the JRE as well as Fred? That's an interesting point, but it seems like it requires more legal brainpower than I have. Hey, how did this thread get over to chat? Damn. Me> I demand that they do 6 reckless and stupid things before Me> breakfast. TC> And that constitutes a token we can use to send you freenet TC> email? Yes, it's my new anti-spam technical solution. I call it "Don't Think Cash." Only by showing that they've done something illogical, risky and self-destructive can users show that they're actually human. ~Mr. Bad -- ~ Mr. Bad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Pigdog Journal | http://pigdog.org/ freenet:MSK@SSK@u1AntQcZ81Y4c2tJKd1M87cZvPoQAge/pigdog+journal// "Statements like this give the impression that this article was written by a madman in a drug induced rage" -- Ben Franklin ~ ___ Chat mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
Re: [freenet-chat] Re: [freenet-devl] JRE License
> "MJR" == Mark J Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
MJR> Yeah, I know that. I was commenting on your double standard,
MJR> where it's acceptable for users of your software to waive
MJR> their right to sue you for damages, but "totally reckless and
MJR> stupid" for Sun's users to do the same.
The GPL non-warranty says that users can't sue me. It's a repudiation
of liability, to the extent possible in law. The JRE license says that
we (collectively) accept liability for problems with the *JRE*, not
with Fred.
"you agree to defend and indemnify Sun and its licensors from
and against any damages, costs, liabilities, settlement
amounts and/or expenses (including attorneys' fees) incurred
in connection with any claim, lawsuit or action by any third
party that arises or results from the use or distribution of
any and all Programs and/or Software."
("Programs" = our stuff, "Software" = Sun stuff). That means that we
are responsible if there is any problems with the JRE -- even separate
from the use of Fred.
MJR> Or were you demanding that your users do a reckless and
MJR> stupid thing?
I demand that they do 6 reckless and stupid things before
breakfast.
~Mr. Bad
--
~
Mr. Bad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Pigdog Journal | http://pigdog.org/
freenet:MSK@SSK@u1AntQcZ81Y4c2tJKd1M87cZvPoQAge/pigdog+journal//
"Statements like this give the impression that this article was
written by a madman in a drug induced rage" -- Ben Franklin
~
___
Chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
