Subject: Re: STWL 1.0, revision 6: please comment
From: Bernhard Fastenrath <bfastenrath@mac.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 20:39:00 +0100


Thank you for your input.

Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Restriction on use.
> 
> What about a wording such as "Licensor requests that you..." similar
> to the one used by Carnegie-Mellon?

I was told that non-enforcable conditions do not belong into the
license. I rephrased the license to use enforceable requirements
and not to rely on polite requests.

>>   4. You agree to be of assistance at least twice if anybody requires your
>>help in installing the software or understanding the software.
>  
> Same thing, but worse.

Why is this a restriction on use?

>>   5. In case the licensee takes legal action alleging infringement of
> 
> First "you", here "licensee"?

This has been changed.

>>software patents the licensee holds, excluding countersuits, and concerning
>>open source software as defined by the Open Source Initiative (OSI) this
>>license is suspended for the duration of the validity of said patents.
> 
> - I'd put "excluding countersuits" between "(OSI)" and "this".
> - no comment about the content

Ok, this has been changed, too.

>>   6. If any part of this license might be against the local or otherwise
>>relevant law or become ineffective in any other way, the rest of the license
>>loses its effect.
> 
> - "might be" is not good in legalese.
>   "might be against" looks to me like German ;-)

Yes, I am German. I copied that one 1:1 from a license that looked like
a prefessional license to me.

> - What about s/the rest.*effect/the license terminates/

The license should not be terminated but instead it should refuse
to be valid in such countries altogether. Terminating the license
is very close to the original wording which Arnoud Engelfriet 
<galactus@stack.nl> commented like this:
 >>> But if the clause is unenforceable, then I don't think it's
 >>> enforceable to invoke an at-will suspension clause. That would
 >>> so evidently be an attempt to avoid the court's order that it
 >>> might be seen as contempt.

>>THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE <project name> PROJECT ``AS IS'' AND
>  
> I still think disclaimers in caps are hard to read.
> 
>>PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE FREEBSD PROJECT OR
> 
>                                                 ^^^^^^^

Ok, this has  been changed.

-- 
www.citizens-initiative.org <http://www.citizens-initiative.org/>