Subject: Re: [boost] Boost licensing information
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-04-15 21:56:42
> I can't help myself bike shedding that clause 8 looks to have less complete no-liability.
> "Except in the cases of wilful misconduct or damages directly caused to natural persons, the Licensor will in no event
> be liable..."
> IANAL, but might look as though - If someone dies from a life-support software malfunction, the author is on the hook? (Damage to
> 'un-natural persons' are exempted I note ;-)
Wilful misconduct or damages directly caused to natural persons is
better known as "a crime".
Under EU law since about 2011 or so, it is illegal to disclaim liability
for that under EU consumer protection law, and a licence or EULA or
contract which does so is problematic and depending on how the rest of
it is written, could be null and void. Indeed there was some past case
law before the ECJ where the disclaimer of liabilities was rendered
void, and a US multinational had to fork out a ton of cash far in excess
of the contracted liability limit to some small European business. If
you read the recommended practices guide for EU lawyers, it suggests to
insert many separate and standalone disclaimers of liability with clear
boundaries around specific things, and not to use broad brush
disclaimers as is typical under US law. The EUPL is following that advice.
But to answer your question, unless someone can prove that you
deliberately made your software target directly specific people or a
specific person, there is no liability in the above clause. Even if you
wrote a virus which trashed people's stuff, unless it can be proved that
you *deliberately* trashed people's stuff and it's not a programming
error by you, you're fine.
-- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk