You know, this would actually make me feel better if you were a lawyer. Even more so, if you were a Linden Lab lawyer. But since (I assume) neither is the case, this is just your interpretation and I see it differently.
On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 04:19:00AM +0200, Dirk Moerenhout wrote: > > If the first one was re-written to say "you are responsible for all NEW > > features etc that you ADDED to make a Third-Party Viewer, etc" it would > > be more clear. > > That will create a false sense of safety. When LL removes code from > the source tree for legal reasons you'd make a TPV developer believe > that he's not liable for that code if he keeps on distributing it (as > you just made him believe he's only responsible for what > developed/added himself). Yet when he has been informed that the code > can not be legally distributed willful continued distribution is an > issue and may see him ending up in court. Off course he should know > this if he reads and understands the GPL. The GPL clearly demonstrates > responsibility for distribution in section 7. > > > The second one should simply drop "develop or distribute". The GNU GPL > > license on LL own page states "6. ...You may not impose any further > > restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein." > > (in this case, "you" being Linden Research), and further includes the No > > Warranty > > paragraphs 11 and 12. Therefore any attempt to impose responsibility, > > risks, expenses, etc on a developer appear to conflict with the GPL. > > No it should not. For starters you do not quote it in full. It > actually says "You assume all risks, expenses, and defects of any > Third-Party Viewers that you use, develop, or distribute. Linden Lab > shall not be responsible or liable for any Third-Party Viewers." > Punctuation is used for readability but doesn't remove the second > sentence from the context. This is LL waving responsibility more than > it is about who it transfers to. If you consider section 11 and 12 of > the GPL this is a reiteration of "THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY > AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE > DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR > CORRECTION.". Note that LL did not restrict you from passing the risks > on to the users of your TPV (they actually imply it transfers to them > already). > > Granted. In the TPVP, like most similar legal documents, they have > reiterated quite a few points that are covered already for example by > the GPL or the TOS. But as I stated before I still need to see the > first sensible example of how this affects somebody beyond what they > should expect regardless of the TPVP. > > Dirk > _______________________________________________ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges -- Carlo Wood <ca...@alinoe.com> _______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
