[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] OSS License

Well, this would solve plenty of problems... like finding an attourney willing to do pro bono work.  The GPL is well researched and tested.  The only item I could see would be to go through the application procedure and get it covered before anything is etched in silicon.  We will probably need to be set up as a legal entity of some kind... PSUBS would probably qualify... or else issue the license to a single individual.  Now, somebody might well take the design and go into production... though I suspect that this would not be as much of a problem as it could be.  The GPL actually encourages this. 

What the GPL will protect us from is an individual or legal entity taking our OSS and copyrighting the design and then trying to charge us for using our own design.  That would suck.  The other item is one of warranty... there is none.  As I understand it, if somebody builds this from our specs, they do so at their own risk.  If they tangle with heteroteuthis Harvei (not sure I got the spelling right), and end up being crushed in its tentacles and eaten, nobody can sue us.  In fact, if they dive to the bottom of their own swimming pool and the hull collapses because of our design flaw, we would still be covered... in theory.

The fact that there will be absolutely no warranty needs to be made abundantly clear in any documentation that we eventually release.

On Tue, 2003-01-28 at 10:20, Warrend Greenway wrote: 
They recommended the GPL, of which they already have a form
intended for non-software documents. The FSF is interested in
promoting the free exchange of information. As for liability,
that is one of the reasons that any hardware is totally out of
the question. Furthermore, they already cover software that
is medical, and aerospace in nature. It sounds like they are
simply interested in helping to make this kind of information
available to the public. Hhhmmmm. Digital signature, though...
I will check the message, I can have them put it on paper...But
they said that there were already projects that dealt with designs
like this under their protection.

Warren.

> Warren, which of their licenses did they recommend?  Did the agreement
> come with any kind of digital signature that can be verified?  I'm a bit
> surprised that they would be so quick to agree to something like this so
> early in the project... submersibles are inherently lawsuits waiting to
> happen.
> 
> On Mon, 2003-01-27 at 13:51, Warrend Greenway wrote:
> 
> > Hey, Dale. I contacted the FSF (Free Software Foundation), and
> > they agreed to harbor us under their legal umbrella. Any input
> > on this? They said that they are already covering similar projects,
> > and that they only problem would be hardware...Which we don't
> > want to cover anyhow. This would mean that we would be covered
> > under the GPL with a preamble. I am open to any discussion on this
> > point. The GPL would have some drawbacks, but it would solve our
> > license problems and give us a legal shield.
> > 
> > Warren.
> 
> 
> Dale A. Raby
> Editor/Publisher
> The Green Bay Web
> http://www.thegreenbayweb.com
<< dalesignature.gif >>






Dale A. Raby

Editor/Publisher

The Green Bay Web

http://www.thegreenbayweb.com

dalesignature.gif