a proposed change to the OSD

[Mahesh T Pai]

David Johnson wrote:

> I still haven't come to grips yet with the concept that a contract is required 
> for disclaimers of warranty. It seems to me that there must be another 
> mechanism that achieves the same result.


You have to make the terms under which you are offering something 
clear.  Situations where a single person (eg. a software developer) 
entering into relationships with several persons ( eg, by distributing 
several copies of the same s/w) on same terms (that is, under the same 
license) are not always treated as *pure* (mark the word pure) 
contractual by courts - at least, in the common-law world.

When you disclaim liability you have to make such disclaimer it clear 
and tell the court that you have informed the recipient of s/w that he 
knew, at least you took sufficient steps to inform the other guy about 
the existence of the disclaimer.  If the relationship is contractual, 
this disclaimer will help you, if not, (status based) nothing will.

That is why, the GNU GPL (and most other licenses) use the phrase 
"THERE IS NO WARRANTY FOR THE PROGRAM, TO THE *EXTENT PERMITTED BY 
APPLICABLE LAW*" in paragraph 11.

Regards,
Mahesh T Pai.




--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3