What is considered off-site usage?

[Matthew Flaschen]

John Cowan wrote:
> With all due respect to the legal profession, this would be fearful
> nonsense. The language of these licenses is as clear as legalese gets
> -- they were written to be clear -- and should not be at all hard to
> understand if you read it carefully.

I agree, for most licenses.

  The lawyers and courts are actually
> more confused than you are. The law of software rights is murky, and
> case law on open-source licenses is (as of mid-2003) nonexistent; no
> one has ever been sued under them.  [No longer quite true.]
> 
> This means a lawyer is unlikely to have a significantly better insight
> than a careful lay reader.

That's actually not a primary motivation in my IANAL disclaimer.  My 
motivations are first, to avoid misleading anyone into thinking I am a 
lawyer, and second, to avoid the (however unlikely) possibility of a UPL 
suit.

Matt Flaschen