Subject: RE: A practical example of a click-wrap license
From: "Lawrence E. Rosen" <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 13:23:48 -0700

Where there are talented hackers there will be a way to implement it
correctly and at least one way to defeat it.  We lawyers merely do our
best to get our clients to do things correctly.  /Larry

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Cowan [mailto:jcowan@reutershealth.com] 
> Sent: Monday, August 05, 2002 12:46 PM
> To: lrosen@rosenlaw.com
> Cc: 'Bruce Perens'; 'John Cowan'; 
> license-discuss@opensource.org; 'Brian Behlendorf'
> Subject: Re: A practical example of a click-wrap license
> 
> 
> Lawrence E. Rosen scripsit:
> 
> > You've made an excellent suggestion.  Here's a possible 
> wording of a 
> > distribution click-wrap notice.  I do not consider this wording 
> > authoritative or final and I encourage suggestions:
> 
> Now, however, two versions of the program must exist: one 
> that demands 
> confirmation on installation, one that exists as part of a 
> distribution and doesn't.  The effort to make sure that the 
> clickless version of the program doesn't leak out is going to 
> be substantial.  In addition, distribution via tarball is 
> going to become impossible (when do you demand the 
> confirmation) despite the way that it is still the primary 
> method of distributing source code.
> 
> -- 
> John Cowan                                
> <jcowan@reutershealth.com>     
> http://www.reutershealth.com              http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
> Yakka foob mog.  Grug pubbawup zink wattoom gazork.  Chumble spuzz.
>     -- Calvin, giving Newton's First Law "in his own words"
> 

--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3