> > Yes, but there is no limit to the "costs of damages and the cost > > of litigation". THAT'S the concern being expressed. > > But, as I outlined, there is a limit. This is not patents. This is > copyright. Copyright law does not provide for unlimited damages. I > agree that there is no limit specified in the assignment, but there is > a limit in reality.
We're not disagreeing. I was responding to the question of "where are people seeing the 'unlimited'". But in my original post, I said that limit was a practical one in reality. > I would not argue that people should not try to talk the FSF out of > this position. I agree, because it's a position the FSF *has* to take. > On the other hand, many companies have apparently had no trouble > signing this. It does, however, give a reason why disclaimed+personal assignment may be a better approach than a corporate assignment in the case where the patch wasn't developed as part of one's work.
