1 |
Two other points, lawyer jargon, and liability. |
2 |
|
3 |
On Tue, 2008-04-22 at 13:37 -0600, RB wrote: |
4 |
> |
5 |
> you may want to 'lawyer' that language out |
6 |
|
7 |
I prefer to keep things in layman's terms as much as possible. Lawyer |
8 |
language means more ambiguity, more room for interpretation. Additional |
9 |
length, etc. Which makes things so the common person has a hard time |
10 |
understanding what they are reading. Then even worse, you might need |
11 |
lawyer to review it, since it's in their language. Which takes them |
12 |
longer, and they likely add more to it, than removing things. Nasty |
13 |
spiral. |
14 |
|
15 |
Anything to do with lawyers, including their language and jargon I like |
16 |
to keep to a minimum. Or legal system is totally out of control as it |
17 |
is. Plus it's not a very effective system, wrt to bang vs buck. Justice |
18 |
on occasion :) |
19 |
|
20 |
> You don't want to be legally liable for someone else's failure to |
21 |
> maintain free infrastructure. |
22 |
|
23 |
What liability? That is a theoretical one only. Who would sue us over |
24 |
that? What would they get from it? What would it cost them? Worse case |
25 |
maybe a riot among membership base. But that's pretty extreme. :) |
26 |
|
27 |
No potential fines or obligations wrt to NM or the Fed. If a company |
28 |
doesn't follow it's own by laws. There is little to no enforcement of |
29 |
that. |
30 |
|
31 |
Keep in mind likely the ones on file now. Might not have been or are |
32 |
being followed now. And who is after us over it? No fines, no law suits. |
33 |
Most don't even care :) |
34 |
|
35 |
-- |
36 |
William L. Thomson Jr. |
37 |
amd64/Java/Trustees |
38 |
Gentoo Foundation |