[License-review] Request for Approval : Modular Open Software License (MOSL)

[Love Nystrom]

Hi Hadrien,

You can't restrict the operation of law, but I think it's prudent to 
include something like your
special clause of information about accountability.  To save yourself 
any nasty surprise lawsuit
you were not even aware could occur.  Convoluted or not, it's food for 
thought.

Personally I'd go for the usual.. the author can not be held accountable 
in any way whatsoever,
and the user must assume the full responsibility of any use of 'the 
product'.
If country Y has laws enforcing accountability, the user must vow 
indemnity from it,
or refrain from using the product.

WBR // Love

On 2013-02-01 02.29, Hadrien G. wrote:
> My problem with this reasoning is that I don't think software 
> licensing terms can do such a thing as restrict the operation of a 
> law. As far as I know, if I distribute the software to Mr X from 
> country Y, and the law of country Y states that all software authors 
> are held responsible for some specific events (such as casualities) 
> occuring due to the use of their software, then in such an event, Mr X 
> is free to sue me without my written consent, whether the license says 
> otherwise or not. As soon as I have distributed the software to him, I 
> am held responsible for whatever happens.
>
> Perhaps it would be possible to write a clause specifying that if 
> applicable law makes a provision for extra warranties, then the 
> software user must inform the software authors of the existence of 
> such legal provision before the license is declared valid, and the 
> software author is free to void that user's license if he can't comply 
> with the law. Sounds like a convoluted way to go about it, though, and 
> the people who wrote the GPL's disclaimer, which I took inspiration 
> from, did not bother to go down this route.
>
> Regards,
> Hadrien
>
> Le 31/01/2013 11:12, Love Nystrom a écrit :
>> Hi Hadrien,
>>
>> Why ?  For your own good.
>> With your phrasing, you can be held accountable for flaws by Mr X 
>> from country Y
>> without having any previous knowledge of your accountability.
>> That's why the AND. Then Mr X will have to contact you in advance and 
>> notify you that country Y
>> has a law BLAH BLAH that can hold you accountable, and you have the 
>> option to decline.
>>
>> I understand your want to be able to accept further accountability by 
>> explicit agreement,
>> so for both sets of conditions to be valid you'll need some further 
>> rephrasing.
>>
>> Just my penny to the pot.
>> WBR // Love
>>
>> (PS. I'm not speaking for OSI, I'm not with that organisation, just 
>> expressing a point of view.)
>>
>>
>> On 2013-01-31 03.07, Hadrien G. wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> If I get it right, that would change the meaning quite 
>>> significantly, going from "country-specific laws or mutually agreed 
>>> warranty contracts can bypass this disclaimer" to "only a 
>>> combination of country law and warranty contracts can make the 
>>> author liable for software flaws". Which effectively translates to 
>>> "only country law can make the author liable for software flaws", 
>>> since software licenses do not override the software author's legal 
>>> responsibilities anyway.
>>>
>>> Why would you prefer it the latter way ?
>>>
>>> Hadrien
>>>
>>> Le 30/01/2013 14:40, Love Nystrom a écrit :
>>>> Hello Hadrien,
>>>>
>>>> I would suggest you rephrase the disclaimer slightly, and and 
>>>> change some ORs to ANDs:
>>>> UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW _AND_ AGREED TO IN WRITING...
>>>>
>>>> Just my penny to the pot.
>>>>
>>>> WBR // Love
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2013-01-30 15.12, Hadrien G. wrote:
>>>> ..abbreviated..
>>>>> **************************************************
>>>>> ***    Modular Open Software License (MOSL)    ***
>>>>> ***      Working Draft 3, 30 January 2013      ***
>>>>> ***  Copyright (c) 2012-2013 Hadrien Grasland  ***
>>>>> **************************************************
>>>>>
>>>>> Redistribution and use of this software, or modified forms of it, 
>>>>> are permitted provided that the following conditions are met:
>>>>>
>>>>> * Redistributions of source code must retain this list of 
>>>>> conditions, the above copyright notice, and the following disclaimer.
>>>>> * Redistributions in binary form must include a copy of this list 
>>>>> of conditions, the above copyright notice, and the following 
>>>>> disclaimer, whether in documentation or in other provided materials.
>>>>> * Redistributions in any form must be accompanied by information 
>>>>> on how to obtain complete source code for this software, and any 
>>>>> accompanying software that makes use of it. Source code must 
>>>>> either be included in the distribution, or be available for no 
>>>>> more than the cost of its distribution. For an executable file, 
>>>>> complete source code means the source code for all modules it 
>>>>> contains, save for modules or files that are typically provided 
>>>>> with the operating system on which the executable file runs.
>>>>>
>>>>> UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW OR AGREED TO IN WRITING, THIS 
>>>>> SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED 
>>>>> WARRANTIES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF 
>>>>> NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY, OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR 
>>>>> PURPOSE. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OF THE SOFTWARE BE LIABLE, 
>>>>> AGAIN UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW OR AGREED TO IN WRITING, 
>>>>> FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY OR 
>>>>> CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF 
>>>>> LIABILITY, ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, 
>>>>> EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
>>>>>
>>>>> ===
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> Neolander
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> License-review mailing list
>>>> License-review at opensource.org
>>>> http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-review
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> License-review mailing list
>>> License-review at opensource.org
>>> http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-review
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> License-review mailing list
>> License-review at opensource.org
>> http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-review
>
> _______________________________________________
> License-review mailing list
> License-review at opensource.org
> http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-review