Hi Jeremy.
> You have to operate on the assumption that the author permits patches.
There is no need to make an assumption and to do so is unsafe. Some copyrights
allow it and some don't. You should check first.
> We assume that no one patches without that being permitted.
I can personally assure you that this is an incorrect assumption.
> One can legally write the software license to limit liability.
When publishing an illegal patch? Sorry, but no. You are totally exposed.
> In fact, most commercial EULAs limit liability to the cost of the
> software when purchased, not to any incidental losses.
1) Have you ever seen a copyright/license/EULA for a patch?
2) What makes one EULA "commercial" and another not?
Regards,
John
John Souvestre - Integrated Data Systems - (504) 355-0609
___________________
Nolug mailing list
nolug@nolug.org
Received on 12/14/08
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : 12/19/08 EST