[opensuse-project] Proposed changes to EULA for next release
Our legal folks send me an update of the openSUSE "EULA" which makes it even smaller ;) Here's the explanation: "I've attached the openSUSE 11.4 license in redline format. The proposed changes are explained by my comments on the right. The changes makes a few clarifications and remove an unnecessary reporting burden that no longer applies to openSUSE." I like the changes, so if nobody sees any problems with them, I'll go ahead and change the EULA. I have attached a LibreOffice document with the proposal, Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, Program Manager openSUSE, aj@{novell.com,opensuse.org} Twitter: jaegerandi | Identica: jaegerandi SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
On 3/23/2011 9:28 AM, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
Our legal folks send me an update of the openSUSE "EULA" which makes it even smaller ;)
Here's the explanation: "I've attached the openSUSE 11.4 license in redline format. The proposed changes are explained by my comments on the right. The changes makes a few clarifications and remove an unnecessary reporting burden that no longer applies to openSUSE."
I like the changes, so if nobody sees any problems with them, I'll go ahead and change the EULA.
I have attached a LibreOffice document with the proposal,
Andreas
Andreas, It looks good to me. -Matt -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
Le 23/03/2011 14:28, Andreas Jaeger a écrit :
I like the changes, so if nobody sees any problems with them, I'll go ahead and change the EULA.
I have attached a LibreOffice document with the proposal,
* I can't display it with the correct character encoding * A large part is taken by openSUSE being under Utah/US laws and limitations. I beg this is linked to Novell being american, when most devs are from germany. I beg we can't avoid this... jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xgxog7_clip-l-ombre-et-la-lumiere-3-bad-pig... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGgv_ZFtV14 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
Am 23/03/11 15:32, schrieb jdd:
Le 23/03/2011 14:28, Andreas Jaeger a écrit :
I like the changes, so if nobody sees any problems with them, I'll go ahead and change the EULA.
I have attached a LibreOffice document with the proposal,
* I can't display it with the correct character encoding Me nether (in OO.o on 11.3 - maybe it is better with LibreO on 11.4 ?)
* A large part is taken by openSUSE being under Utah/US laws and limitations. I beg this is linked to Novell being american, when most devs are from germany. I beg we can't avoid this...
jdd
Maybe someone could ask my colleges (in Utah? from Novell?) if and in what rate/in what amount they have considered the interests of the SUSE GmbH and each of the the German/European programmers beside the interests of the Novell Inc.? Have they also estimated the probability that and possible amount of claim if a (German?) judge/court rates German/European/Korean/... law applicable? Have they thought about explicitly referring to "vorsätzlichem" (approximately translated en: indented or knowingly) and "grob fahrlässigem" (approximately translated en: grossly negligently) behaving? I apprehend the hole clause for exclusions of liability would be rated null and void without an explicit exception of any intently, knowingly and grossly negligently caused damages.[1] But please do not make me liable for rising that question ;-) [2]. Regards Martin (pistazienfresser) [1] See: § 309 No. 7 and § 306 Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch (BGB) and you may also just google/look in a book for "Verbot der geltungserhaltenden Reduktion" [2] further reading: de: http://dejure.org/gesetze/BGB/309.html (with links to court decisions and some papers) http://dejure.org/gesetze/BGB/306.html en (translated text of the law): http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_bgb/englisch_bgb.html#BGBengl_000... http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_bgb/englisch_bgb.html#BGBengl_000... [2] apart from any intently, knowingly or grossly negligently caused damages - see (also) § 675 section II BGB http://dejure.org/gesetze/BGB/675.html http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_bgb/englisch_bgb.html#BGBengl_000... (en) -- - openSUSE profile: https://users.opensuse.org/show/pistazienfresser -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
On Wednesday, March 23, 2011 19:07:27 pistazienfresser (see profile) wrote:
Am 23/03/11 15:32, schrieb jdd:
Le 23/03/2011 14:28, Andreas Jaeger a écrit :
I like the changes, so if nobody sees any problems with them, I'll go ahead and change the EULA.
I have attached a LibreOffice document with the proposal,
* I can't display it with the correct character encoding
Me nether (in OO.o on 11.3 - maybe it is better with LibreO on 11.4 ?)
* A large part is taken by openSUSE being under Utah/US laws and limitations. I beg this is linked to Novell being american, when most devs are from germany. I beg we can't avoid this...
jdd
Maybe someone could ask my colleges (in Utah? from Novell?) if and in what rate/in what amount they have considered the interests of the SUSE GmbH and each of the the German/European programmers beside the interests of the Novell Inc.?
The document wasdiscussed on this list a couple of years ago, you can read some background about it at: http://zonker.opensuse.org/2008/11/26/opensuse-sports-a-new-license-ding-don... the-eulas-dead/ We really tried to use a generic, easy to understand document that is as open as the software we distribute ;). If you have specific concerns, please raise them. I heard no objection to the changes I proposed - so let's move forward with them, while we can continue discussing specific concerns for those areas that are in the document for more than 2 years now, Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, Program Manager openSUSE, aj@{novell.com,opensuse.org} Twitter: jaegerandi | Identica: jaegerandi SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
Am 24/03/11 09:43, schrieb Andreas Jaeger: [...]
* A large part is taken by openSUSE being under Utah/US laws and limitations. I beg this is linked to Novell being american, when most devs are from germany. I beg we can't avoid this...
jdd
Maybe someone could ask my colleges (in Utah? from Novell?) if and in what rate/in what amount they have considered the interests of the SUSE GmbH and each of the the German/European programmers beside the interests of the Novell Inc.?
The document wasdiscussed on this list a couple of years ago, you can read some background about it at: http://zonker.opensuse.org/2008/11/26/opensuse-sports-a-new-license-ding-don... the-eulas-dead/
We really tried to use a generic, easy to understand document that is as open as the software we distribute ;).
I do not have any objections to an easy to understand document. To be bold I think I do not really understand the complete meaning of all the phrases in the proposal as it most probably will need not only the knowledge of normal English language but also of the US system of law including the according US' and especially Utah's laws and courts' decisions. If you have specific concerns, please raise
them. Rephrased: The sentence: "with the exception of any intently, knowingly and grossly negligently caused damages" or something like it is missing. Because of that the developers (or all openSUSE members) may probably just be just be liable (in Germany) for *any* negligently caused damages. Even for those caused by slight negligence.
And I think I have described my concerns really specific (maybe too specific?): Am 23/03/11 19:07, schrieb pistazienfresser (see profile): [....]
Have they also estimated the probability that and possible amount of claim if a (German?) judge/court rates German/European/Korean/... law applicable?
Have they thought about explicitly referring to "vorsätzlichem" (approximately translated en: indented or knowingly) and "grob fahrlässigem" (approximately translated en: grossly negligently) behaving? I apprehend the hole clause for exclusions of liability would be rated null and void without an explicit exception of any intently, knowingly and grossly negligently caused damages.[1] [...]
[1] See: § 309 No. 7 and § 306 Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch (BGB) and you may also just google/look in a book for "Verbot der geltungserhaltenden Reduktion" [edited: sorry this belongs to the same topic] further reading: de: http://dejure.org/gesetze/BGB/309.html (with links to court decisions and some papers) http://dejure.org/gesetze/BGB/306.html en (translated text of the law):
http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_bgb/englisch_bgb.html#BGBengl_000...
http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_bgb/englisch_bgb.html#BGBengl_000...
The accordingly problem of a mostly invalid standard form contracts (invalid because of the same reason) was discussed just on this same list a few weeks ago: - http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-project/2011-02/msg00076.html and following - http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-project/2011-02/msg00149.html and following. Compare also for possible wordings the English translation and explaining of the old CC-de-1.0 under 6. under http://mirrors.creativecommons.org/international/de/english-changes.pdf If you have any specific questions on that issues/bugs, you may raise them. Most probably I will be able to give references to more materials if wanted. But I still would prefer if you would ask someone with a insurance backing for that.
I heard no objection to the changes I proposed
No not to the changes. Just the hole clause about liability. What is the sense in this EULA without a valid exemption from liability? - so let's move forward with
them, while we can continue discussing specific concerns for those areas that are in the document for more than 2 years now,
Have a lot of luck/fun in discussing Regards Martin -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 9:28 AM, Andreas Jaeger <aj@novell.com> wrote:
Our legal folks send me an update of the openSUSE "EULA" which makes it even smaller ;)
Here's the explanation: "I've attached the openSUSE 11.4 license in redline format. The proposed changes are explained by my comments on the right. The changes makes a few clarifications and remove an unnecessary reporting burden that no longer applies to openSUSE."
I like the changes, so if nobody sees any problems with them, I'll go ahead and change the EULA.
I have attached a LibreOffice document with the proposal,
Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, Program Manager openSUSE, aj@{novell.com,opensuse.org}
Looks good, but shouldn't the copyright date at the end be updated from 2008? (I don't know the law, but when I edit docs, I update copyright years to current.) Greg -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org
participants (5)
-
Andreas Jaeger -
Greg Freemyer -
jdd -
Matt Hayes -
pistazienfresser (see profile)