Subject: Re: Question regarding certification
From: Walter van Holst <walter.van.holst@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 21:43:06 +0100

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 09:47:43 -0500, John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com> wrote:

> Actually, that's questionable on several different grounds.  Only the
> GPL explicitly says it is not a contract; BSD-ish licenses aren't
> either, but since they are basically just waivers, there's no need to
> be (at least in common-law countries); most of the corporate licenses
> as well as the AFL and OSL are explicitly contracts.

That is the point exactly, in a civil law country you can't just
exonerate liabilities by a waiver. And furthermore, even within a
contract you can't just exonerate all liabilities, you have to provide
clear exonerations that cannot be unreasonable either.

> As complicated as any stereotypical lawyer could hope for.  :-)

I am not the stereotypical lawyer, although a bit of complexity always
helps to prove my added value :-)

Regards,

 Walter