Subject: RE: a proposed change to the OSD
From: "Lawrence E. Rosen" <lrosen@rosenlaw.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 10:03:08 -0700

I'm getting tired of repeating myself....

I have proposed a click-wrap notice that would allow ONE single notice
for all the programs in a distribution.  I believe that one notice is
legally sufficient and indeed necessary to obtain affirmative assent to
the licenses for the individual works comprising that distribution. 

Other lawyers may disagree, and every lawyer is free to give legal
advice to his/her clients.  And if you don't like click-wrap notices,
don't use them for your software.  Just to be clear, I will ALWAYS
recommend one to my clients -- at least until the law changes.

/Larry

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Cowan [mailto:jcowan@reutershealth.com] 
> Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2002 9:51 AM
> To: lrosen@rosenlaw.com
> Cc: 'Russell Nelson'; license-discuss@opensource.org
> Subject: Re: a proposed change to the OSD
> 
> 
> Lawrence E. Rosen scripsit:
> 
> > Russ, if it was your intent to prevent click-wrap notices, then I'm 
> > While many in the open source community are opposed to such 
> notices, I 
> > will ALWAYS recommend to my clients that they use such notices for 
> > their software, and that they require their sublicensees to 
> use such 
> > notices.
> 
> That could get old real fast, when the typical program 
> requires the use of a dozen component libraries to function.  
> How many dialogue boxes are you willing to click on before 
> the Gimp starts up?  Or should each user when logging on to 
> the system for the first time be presented with about 700 of 
> them to click on?
> 
> This is the "annoying [old-]BSD notice requirement" in a new guise.
> 
> > Members of the community may not like
> > it, but the courts are clear about the importance of such 
> notices for 
> > contract formation.  Whine and groan all you like, it's a legal 
> > necessity....  I'll change my mind about this only after 
> you succeed 
> > in changing the law.
> 
> I agree with what you say, but draw a different conclusion, 
> viz. that contracts involving mere use (as opposed to a 
> copyright-holder right such as modification) are a Very Bad Thing.
> 
> -- 
> John Cowan  jcowan@reutershealth.com  www.reutershealth.com  
> ccil.org/~cowan
> Dievas dave dantis; Dievas duos duonos          --Lithuanian proverb
> Deus dedit dentes; deus dabit panem             --Latin 
> version thereof
> Deity donated dentition;
>   deity'll donate doughnuts                     --English 
> version by Muke Tever
> 

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