Question regarding a new local license approach

Walter van Holst walter.van.holst at
Thu Mar 10 10:43:53 UTC 2005

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 05:30:54 -0500, Chuck Swiger <chuck at> wrote:

> What about CDDL clause #5:

Has exactly the same problems.

> Is this invalid under Dutch law, meaning that it is impossible to use
> software covered by this license?

It is possible to use it, but it is hard for Sun to stick to the dry
text of the license if any dispute over it would arise. Essentially
the problem is not overly big, a judge would be quite willing to
accept that you cannot have much of an expectation regarding the
fitness of use of software that you obtained without having to pay a
license fee. The problem is much more that it will take a court
decision to make sure that this kind of limitations that are common in
open source licenses are enforcable in the Netherlands. Let me put it
this way: I would expect Sun to win such a court case, but the basis
would be much more in implied law than in the writing in the license.
And relying on implied law is never a good starting point to begin

> CDDL has above.  If your country's law does not permit that to take
> place without having a contract signed between the two parties, I guess
> that means people there are being excluded from a lot of Open Source
> Software...?

My mistake by using the word 'contract' too losely. It does not
necessary require a written contract, but at least an implied
agreement about its intended use. That last bit is a result of
EU-legislation as implemented in national law. So people aren't so
much as excluded from open source software but the basis of their
right to use it



More information about the License-discuss mailing list