[opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list
nexisentertainment at gmail.com
Thu Apr 15 15:27:34 PDT 2010
The TPV has no differentiation between source code and binary. The GPL
requires sourcecode distribution anyway. He's in the wrong and I
suspect he knows it.
Also, to be quite frank, contracts that are designed to be displayed
whenever the user logs into a service should be written so it is clear
to the *user* what their responsibilities and restrictions are. If you
want to have a "legalese" version, it should be attached as a "more
detailed" link for the lawyers to look at. No one is going to hire a
lawyer just to look at an e-document every damn time they sign into a
On Thu, 2010-04-15 at 18:12 -0400, Michael Daniel wrote:
> VR Hacks wrote:
> >> I mean you can't legally be held liable for users who refuse to follow a
> >> contract they made with you, can you?
> > Sure you can. After all, if you write malicious code, you know you're doing
> > it.
> I stand corrected, then. I wasn't really talking about malicious code,
> though. I was just talking about protection from the worst-case
> scenario where a client has an unintended bug in it that causes rolling
> restarts, then LL comes after the 3rd party dev for damages. I meant to
> talk about incompetent coders, not malicious coders (I know that none of
> the coders on this mailing list fit either description, but it's still
> something to think about). Even LL sidesteps liability for damages done
> by the official viewer, so why shouldn't 3rd party devs try to do the
> same thing?
> On a different subject: Is Fractured Crystal correct in the following
> video when he says that he is not breaking TOS with the Onyx viewer
> because he only distributes the source code and not the binaries of it?
> ~Bubblesort Triskaidekaphobia
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
More information about the opensource-dev