On 2002.07.17 21:31 Andy R wrote:
> --- "Karl O . Pinc" <kop@meme.com> wrote:
> > like he thinks
> > licenses are irrelevant.  They are not.  In case you
> > don't happen to
> > know, you can be held responsible for damage caused
> > by your software
> > unless you use a license which prevents this.  You
> 
> Fine. Show us precedence. If you're going to attempt
> to spread fear, back it up. I find it very hard to
> believe.

I cite the new BSD license.  It contains a disclaimer of liability.
It is used by coders instead of placing code in the public domain in
order to protect the author from civil liability (asset seizure.)
AFICT, IANAL, that's the _only_ point in using the BSD license.

I'm not interested in "spreading fear".  I'm interested in pithy
descriptions of the various license categories.  If you're not, or
don't think the topic is important or interesting, I'm not here to
persuade you otherwise.  I mentioned the harm that can result from the
wrong licensing choice, and argue there is a significant difference
between licenses, only because I've been derided for wishing to
describe licenses.  In the end, it doesn't matter why I think licenses
are important.  Either you want to help me describe them or you don't.
I don't care either way.

Karl <kop@meme.com>