O> IANAL, however, this doesn't sound right. I can GPL my stuff, > and still have a EULA. I just have to be willing to supply source. You can have an EULA providing it doesn't conflict with the GPL (and local law). That makes the EULA for the code rather limited in what it can contain 8) > Most software comes with a disclaimer insisting that the author > is not responsible for damages and that the user indemnifies the > author. Yes, and generally speaking it is partly worthless. Most legal systems prohibt the exclusion of negligence by contract or other means and the rest of the stuff you can get away with via contract by claiming not to sell software is on the current agenda to be fixed. EU Lawmakers are more than a little sick of the current state of affairs for certain. Anyway the GPL already includes such wording and provision to keep GPL messages printed by the software from being removed. > No. For example, even with GPL, it's normal for people to insist that > their software is not being released for purposes of helping commit > crimes. For example, some software which rips CDs include EULAs that > prohibit the use for duplicating CDs except for personal "fair use" > type application. The GPL wouldn't permit that as a restriction. It doesn't need it anyway as it is already controlled - in law. You can certainly add a piracy is a crime screen if you want and anyone receiving it can delete that screen too. Alan -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
