[ILUG] GPL clarification.

[Gareth Eason]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Kae Verens wrote:
[munch...]
| I don't understand any of this, which is why I don't bother licensing
my code.
[munch...]


	   Hi,

	Just for the record, one of the reasons why a license (rather than just
an arbitrary release through the power of pasting to a website) is often
a good thing is that there's a legal standpoint for legal liability and
dissuasion of same.

	e.g. I use your CMS and it fails horribly and deletes my only copy of
some really valuable data - so I sue you for damages because I used your
product in good faith with the legal liabilities as presented (i.e. none
- - unless there's a license / fitness-for-purpose statement.)

	Another e.g. I take your CMS code (you've made it available for free)
and add some malicious code onto it. I then add in some incompetent code
and then I break it some more (in subtle, data ruining ways) I then
merrily release it as the CMS by Mr. Kae Verens - because it did start
as your code and there's no legal starting point from whence you may
argue that my version is not a 'valid' version, nor that I may not use
your name except on official releases from yourself.

	Both examples are slightly contrived, I will admit, but I think
demonstrate the point regarding licensing and how it's sometimes useful
to have a legal statement as (at least) a starting point for potential
litigation. I appreciate that you'll likely never want to sue someone
for use of your code, but in this day and age of spurious litigation and
ambulance chasing you never know when you might need to defend yourself.

	IANAL, YMMV, usual disclaimers apply, etc.

	Best regards,
	-->Gar

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFCTCR7K36C50PvIR8RAhzhAJ4hahEH3MF1Xai3uVudiugaMx4m6ACfS+B1
+R0b5mdPMikvW/JkIVTlMhw=
=gDj+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----