Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > No, not at all. The text clearly says that we are to idemnify Sun in for > anything anyone could sue them over while doing something involving "the > use or distribution of (our) Operating System", except if something > happened "not under (our) direction or control". It doesn't matter that > you can quote a part of that statement and say "it's too broad! Oh, > look!", because if you quote part of it, you're not quoting the entire > statement, and your statement isn't complete nor does it reflect the > intention of the person who wrote it.
Unfortunately, only modifications under our direction and control can happen to our Operating System, so the exception can't be used as you want, as explained in Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > That's called "basic grammar". I call it pointless pedantry. I've tried it myself in the past and it really doesn't help. You just get stuck at "this is ambiguous" which never satisfies anyone. > [...] But do you think a judge have anyone pay a fine if > they made an honest mistake while creating something that shouts "NO > WARRANTY" all over? [...] It's possible, because the licensee must agree that the DLJ prevails over all else (and the DLJ says we indemnify Sun for our Operating System), as in Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Please reply to the other messages on these topics, in preference to this. Regards, -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
