SGI OpenVault

Wilfredo Sanchez wsanchez at
Wed Apr 28 17:15:06 UTC 1999

| Perhaps another idea is to convince some of the larger companies  
to wash
| their liability by granting the source code to some smaller  
| perhaps a non-profit or not-for-profit industry organization,  
which is not
| nearly as attractive as a litigation target as Apple or SGI might be. 

  We've discussed that here, and the legal team thinks that even so,  
given that the large company knows that the smaller  
please-sue-me-instead group is distributing our code basically as the  
company's proxy, that it could still be held liable for contributory  
infringement, for having given the organization the code with the  
intent of having them distribute it; you can simply pass the hot  

  It is clear, in Apple's case, at least, that a (big) reason we  
opened the source was to have it distributed in hopes of having other  
improve on it. We've said as much publically. So the intent is  
clear, and the possible liability comes with it, regardless of how we  
go about getting the code out there.

  Trying to dance around law is a tricky business, and the best  
thing to do is usually to just plain cover your tail, and play it  


More information about the License-discuss mailing list