Legal soundness comes to open source distribution
david at usermode.org
Sat Aug 3 21:17:57 UTC 2002
On Saturday 03 August 2002 01:11 pm, Rod Dixon wrote:
> The Netscape-Smart-download case follows the
> prevailing legal climate; namely, the licensor increases the risks of
> losing a legal challenge to the license (either under the enforcement of a
> license provision or the formation of the entire agreement) if the licensor
> does not carefully ensure that proof of mutual assent can be shown.
I'm wondering what challenges an Open Source developer faces without a
click-thru license. What risks does he face if it is ruled that the user did
not assent to the license?
For a proprietary developer, the risks involve critical reviews of the
software being published, someone reverse engineering the software and
discovering how it works, and the sale of used software under the first sale
rule. But as Open Source developers we don't care about that stuff.
For an Open Source developer, the risk is ONLY in regards to getting sued for
damages. We don't want to get sued so we include warranty and liability
disclaimers in our licenses. But it has not been made clear to me that mutual
assent is necessary to disclaim warranty, or whether mutual assent is
sufficient to remove liability.
pgp public key on website
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
More information about the License-discuss