Re: [AD] giftware license

[Elias Pschernig <elias@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, 2004-10-02 at 00:26 +0200, Michal Molhanec wrote:

> > I attached a new patch against faq._tx - it has the above changes, and
> > some revised wording (but I'm no native speaker as well). And while
> > reading it again, I'm wondering about that last disclaimer (which I
> > guess is out of GPL or MIT).. it's much less understandable than the
> > one with the dog :P 
> 
> that's because this one is for lawyers :-) as you mentioned we already 
> have version for normal people :-)
> 

Yes.. but if it's for lawyers - we need not put it. Since lawyers will
only look at the disclaimer, not the FAQ :P I'm going to remove it..

> > +      any purpose you want. But the fact that the contributor holds the
> > +      copyright means that you cannot claim that you wrote the code.
> 
> well, i'm not sure about removing the "e.g.". it completely changes the 
> meaning. i'm not lawyer so i cannot guarantee that this is the only 
> consequence copyright has
> 

Yes, true, I'll put the e.g. back.

> BTW until some real lawyer will correct this faq we should provide one 
> more point:
> 
> Are you totally sure about this FAQ?
>    We are programmers not lawyers. This FAQ represents our current
>    understanding of copyright law. Also remember that there are
>    differences in the copyright law between countries. This FAQ
>    is covered by Allegro disclaimer.
> 
> :-))
> 

Hm. I like this. But maybe we should formulate the question a bit
different:

I took your code. Will you sue me?
Your library destroyed my PC. Who do I sue?
   We are programmers not lawyers. This FAQ represents our current
   understanding of copyright law (or copyright laws in different
   countries). But given the license, which allows everything, and
   the disclaimer, which says we take no responsibility for anything,
   we really don't see how there could be any problems.

-- 
Elias Pschernig