On Wednesday 07 June 2006 14:30, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 12:51:25PM +0300, George Danchev wrote: > > On Wednesday 07 June 2006 12:34, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > > What I cannot imagine is a case where an upstream change would result > > > in only Sun's Java to break rather than a whole bunch of applications > > > (so they would most likely be noticed before the release), and/or to do > > > so on Debian only, rather than on every Linux distribution out there; > > > and it would seem that for any case where the effects are much wider > > > than just Debian, it can reasonably be argued that the problems are, > > > not under our control, which would free us from the burden of having to > > > idemnify Sun. > > > > > > If I'm misguided, I'd be happy to be enlightened. But I don't think I > > > am. > > > > If you are not misguided, then why DLJ license creators put texts like: > > > > "the use or distribution of your Operating System, or any part > > thereof, in any manner" > > > > directly into the license? > > I dunno? It doesn't matter, because the text goes on to say
It does matter in the courts. > You shall not be obligated under Section 2(f)(i) if such claim > would not have occurred but for a modification made to your > Operating System by someone not under your direction or control, > and you were in compliance with all other terms of this Agreement. > > If it didn't, you had a point. As it is, you don't. I disagreed, look below. > > And you are not to be liable for that only if the modifications made > > to the underlying systemm are not under your control. If a new > > upstream version of glibc or the kernel breaks Sun java to function > > properly or as documented then I believe (according to the license) > > someone should be be held liable for that break. Who's that? Upsteam? > > That's Not Our Problem(TM). We're only to indemnify Sun for the things > we are directly responsible for. It doesn't mention /anything/ about the > stuff for which we are not directly responsible. It easily could became Our Problem(TM) if the break is caused by patch(es) applied to upstream versions by Debian Developer(s) ? How can you ensure that a break will not happend or in a case of such indemnification wont be more than Sun's removal from the official Debian archives. -- pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 2003-03-18 <people.fccf.net/danchev/key pgp.mit.edu> fingerprint 1AE7 7C66 0A26 5BFF DF22 5D55 1C57 0C89 0E4B D0AB -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
