YAOSL - Yet Another Open Source License v1.03

[Angelo Schneider]

Hi,

please see below.

>> > 6. You are not required to distribute your patches under the terms of
>> > this license. However, by submitting your patches to the copyright
>> > holder you grant the copyright holder the right to distribute a new
>> > version of the software that includes your patches under these terms.
>> 
>> Hmmm, possible loophole. If I don't submit my patch to you, but someone
>> downstream from me does, do you still get to change my patches to your
>> license?

>Yes, assuming that the person downstream from you had the right to give
>me the software knowing that I would release it under new license terms.
>If they don't have the right and I know it then I would be legally
>liable; if they don't have the right and I don't know it, at least you
>could sue them.

In europe you would be sued as well.

You are responsible for qwhat you do, not only the man in the middle.

Of cource you can re-sue him as well, but you are not out of trouble
upfront.

Don't know how this is kept in the U.S.

Also:
> > 7. If you are unable to follow all of the terms of this license due to
> > a court order or any other reason, then the license is void and you are
> > prohibited from exercising any of the rights granted by it.
> 
> This clause actually affects the normal use of the software. Unisys bitches
> because you incorporated a gif, now I am forbidden to even execute the
> program.

And:
> > 8. If any portion of this license is unenforcible in your jurisdiction
> > then the entire license is considered void and not granted, and you
> > have no rights regarding the software.
> 
> This is similar to the above. What if a nation (France for example) ruled that
> something was unenforcable (the 90 days for another example). This would mean
> that no one in the nation of France is able to use the software at all.
> 
> I think a better solution would be to change this into a severability clause

Again: In (most of) Europe a contract/license is void if one of the
clauses 
does not confirm to laws or court interpretation of laws.

This is radical different to U.S. treatment of contracts vs. law.

As far as I know a contract has higher binding than laws/courts in the
U.S.

Regars,
	Angelo

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Angelo Schneider           OOAD/UML           Angelo.Schneider at xcc.de
Putlitzstr. 24         Patterns/FrameWorks       Fon: +49 721 9812465
76137 Karlsruhe             C++/JAVA             Fax: +49 721 9812467