Subject: RE: DRAFT: OSL version 3.0
From: "Lawrence Rosen" <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 13:13:09 -0700

> Also, I see you have modified section 8 (it now reads much 
> like the OVPL mod to the CDDL). Would you consider a similar 
> modification to section 7? The risk here is (as I understand 
> it) that certain jurisdictions prevent total (or very wide) 
> disclaimer from warranty as unfair. That would risk voiding 
> the sentence starting "Except as expressly stated". The 
> problem then is that the remainder of the clause essentially 
> provides that no license is given under such circumstances. 
> If one accepts there is a risk that the sentence starting 
> "Except" could be struck in certain jurisdictions, this makes 
> the license extremely unattractive in those jurisdictions. Is 
> it possible to make the exclusion of warranty only effect to 
> the extent permitted by law?

I think that adding such a sentence would be contrary to the second-to-last
sentence of section 7: "This DISCLAIMER of warranty constitutes an essential
part of this License." I'm sorry, but if my disclaimer of software
warranties is not legal in your jurisdiction, then please don't use my free
software. You have no license. Return it for your money back.

That said, we both realize that the law always trumps a license. If I don't
like the way your jurisdiction treats software warranty disclaimers, I
better not try to sell my free software to you because your law then
prevails. Of course, if you copy it illegally and import it into your
country, that's your problem not mine, and you better not try to enforce my
warranty in places where I refuse to sell.

And if your local law happens to have an escape hatch that declares that
open source software is free of warranties other than those expressly given
in the license, then the dislaimer of warranty in the OSL wins.

/Larry Rosen