On 09/04/2018 04:57 PM, Warren Samples via use-livecode wrote:
It seems reasonable. They want to avoid any unanticipated legal hassles ($$$) with open-source license holders, and also avoid having to turn over anything that they would prefer to be their own private intellectual property. They're on the ball. How this would play out could depend on which open-source license is involved. There are possibly some that they could accept since they allow more freedom than some others.
That's my take as well. They're looking ahead to avoid conflicting licenses and keep out of legal trouble. I haven't seen that in a contract before, but now that I see it I'm surprised why not. No doubt it's a good thing that they pulled it out - it's something for the lawyer types to throw around.
A few years ago I found a clause in an nda that, among other things, stipulated that I was not to disclose the existence of the nda (!). I squawked about it and refused to sign and the lawyers struck the clause.
-- Mark Wieder ahsoftw...@gmail.com _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
