Re: [hackers] [libzahl] Switch to ISC license. || Mattias Andrée

From: Mattias Andrée <>
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 22:01:47 +0200

On Thu, 2 Jun 2016 15:30:20 -0400
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe <> wrote:

> From: Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe <>
> To: hackers mail list <>
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Subject: Re: [hackers] [libzahl] Switch to ISC license.
> || Mattias Andrée Reply-To:
> In-Reply-To: <>
> Mattias,
> Quoth Mattias Andrée:
> >> > Now, if we could only get rid of the disclaimer,
> >> > but I suspect it is required in some jurisdictions.
> >>
> >> It's required in all jurisdictions. I challenge you
> >> to find one where this isn't needed, afaik there
> >> is none.
> >> Commercial law is pretty clear in this case. If
> >> something blows your computer up, you could
> >> theoretically sue. So yeah, let's keep it.
> >
> >Perhaps. I don't really know about the disclaimer
> >stuff, but I would imagine that either you must
> >state it, or it would be the default, and the latter
> >seem must more reasonable. And anyone could sue
> >in either case anyway, and it's up to the court to
> >decide. All this disclaimer stuff all seem like put
> >a disclaimer on an axe stating that the manufacture
> >is not responsible accidental dismemberment as a
> >result of clumsy use, no reasonable judge would think
> >they are anyway, why you not find such disclaimers
> >on axes.
> Of course you’re right, but I wouldn’t underestimate the
> insanity of the human species. I recently got a box of
> Taiwanese pastries with this warning printed on the back:
> “Please chew and swallow carefully to avoid choking. We
> are not responsible for any damage caused by this
> product.”

Do you think anyone have choked on pastries before and sued?

Do most countries actually require that you state that
your are not responsible for damages causes by something
you are warning about? The warning is enough here, or at
least I have never seen a disclaimer, only a warning label,
and we don't even have translation for ‘disclaimer’.

> While I understand wanting to protect oneself, the
> question of encouraging this madness should be considered
> carefully. The ISC license seems sane enough. As
> licenses go, the one used by FreeBSD chat(8) cannot be
> beaten.[0] :)

Nice one, but I think the FreeBSD project does too much
GPL-bashing. GPL is a good license, at least if you value
free software higher than open source.

Unfortunately public domain has some serious problems,
like, can I make substantial contribution to public domain
software, and dedicate the contribution to the public domain,
if I leave in a country (basically any country other than US
and the commonwealth) where you cannot dedicate things to
the public domain?

> Regards,

Received on Thu Jun 02 2016 - 22:01:47 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Thu Jun 02 2016 - 22:12:14 CEST