On Wed, 7 Jun 2006 09:42:01 -0700 (PDT) Ken Arromdee wrote: > On Tue, 6 Jun 2006, Matthew Palmer wrote: > > Although I'm not sure about the absolute validity of the argument > > that licences have to be written incomprehensibly, I certainly think > > that this revised FAQ preamble allows people to rely on the > > statements in the FAQ sufficiently. > > I don't get it. Half of the problem was that the FAQ said it doesn't > count, but the other half of the problem was that the license said > that the FAQ doesn't count. It seems that fixing the preamble fixes > the first half of the problem but not the second. > > The license still says that it "supersedes all prior or > contemporaneous oral or written communications, proposals, > representations and warranties and prevails over any conflicting or > additional terms of any quote, order, acknowledgment, or other > communication between the parties relating to its subject matter > during the term of this Agreement". So the FAQ--including the part of > the preamble which says that it does count--still doesn't count after > all.
I think you're right.
It seems the FAQ is still non-binding on Sun...
--
:-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-)
......................................................................
Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgp9LGWS8KN2z.pgp
Description: PGP signature
