From: Greg Colvin (Gregory.Colvin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-12-03 20:50:57
At 06:30 PM 12/3/2002, Sean Parent wrote:
>on 12/3/02 1:44 PM, Terje Slettebø at tslettebo_at_[hidden] wrote:
>> Is Adobe asking for more from a non-profit community like Boost, than they
>> are willing to give themselves, for software they sell? This license is for
>> the free Acrobat Reader, but I doubt the commercial versions are much
>> different in this respect. In any case, Boost is free, as well. The above
>> license also has an "AS IS" clause.
>As I said - we aren't asking for any more (but our lawyers will take as much
>as they can get).
>> Isn't the case more one of how much they can depend on support and
>> development (such as a company or community backing something up), rather
>> than guarantees about the software being made?
>No - the concern from legal is about exposure. If we include sources from
>boost, they contain an "AS IS" clause and contains IP encumbered material
>then we're the ones that get nailed.
OK, but Boost has limited resources to be absolutely
sure that we aren't infringing on someone else's IP,
and it isn't at all clear who at Boost one could sue,
let alone squeeze any money out of. So it seems you
are on the hook regardless.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk