> On May 24, 2019, at 6:33 AM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, 24 May 2019, Kate Stewart wrote: >> On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 12:50 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Thu, 23 May 2019, Allison Randal wrote: >>>> On 5/23/19 5:52 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >>>>> On Thu, 23 May 2019, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >>>>>> - * >>>>>> - * This program is distributed "as is" WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY of any kind, >>>>>> - * whether express or implied; without even the implied warranty of >>>>>> - * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU >>>>>> - * General Public License for more details. >>>>> >>>>> A new variant of the scheme ... >>>> >>>> Agreed on holding this one in the pile for further review. In this case, >>>> I'd say it's not materially different than the GPL-style disclaimer, >>>> even though it uses the BSD-style "as is" text. >>> >>> Right. My gut feeling would have waved it through, but the pattern matching >>> machine flagged it and while IANAL i started to become ANAL about these >>> details... >>> >> Agree, in the messy set it belongs. > > Which brings me to the question about these disclaimers in general. The FSF > proposed short disclaimer says: > > This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, > but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of > MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the > GNU General Public License for more details. > > It points to the GPL for details and that (the in kernel variant of v2) > says: > > NO WARRANTY > > 11. BECAUSE THE PROGRAM IS LICENSED FREE OF CHARGE, THERE IS NO WARRANTY > FOR THE PROGRAM, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW. EXCEPT WHEN > OTHERWISE STATED IN WRITING THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND/OR OTHER PARTIES > PROVIDE THE PROGRAM "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED > OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF > MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK AS > TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE > PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, > REPAIR OR CORRECTION. > > 12. IN NO EVENT UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW OR AGREED TO IN WRITING > WILL ANY COPYRIGHT HOLDER, OR ANY OTHER PARTY WHO MAY MODIFY AND/OR > REDISTRIBUTE THE PROGRAM AS PERMITTED ABOVE, BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR DAMAGES, > INCLUDING ANY GENERAL, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING > OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE PROGRAM (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED > TO LOSS OF DATA OR DATA BEING RENDERED INACCURATE OR LOSSES SUSTAINED BY > YOU OR THIRD PARTIES OR A FAILURE OF THE PROGRAM TO OPERATE WITH ANY OTHER > PROGRAMS), EVEN IF SUCH HOLDER OR OTHER PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE > POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. > > So it would be interesting to investigate which of the modified disclaimers > actually says something substantually different than the detailed version. > yes, once we have collected the full set of additional/different disclaimers, I think the next step is to do this kind of analysis. I suspect a bunch will be fine from this perspective, and then we can focus on what to do with the ones that are truly different or extend the disclaimer in some substantive way. Jilayne
