Brian Vincent wrote:
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 07:38:42 -0600, Jeremy White jwhite@codeweavers.com wrote:
I've been speaking privately with Eben Moglen about this new effort, and he tells me that they would like to have the Wine Project as one if their very first clients.
I think this is an excellent idea.
A little of my experience with lawyers. I fully trust Jeremy to know this, and know how to handle this. Still, it's something to keep in mind.
Lawyers are hired to cover their asses. When you go out to consult with one, they are usually trained to do just one thing - alert you to the dangers of the actions you are about to take. Actually, at least in Israel, malpractice laws more or less require them to do so.
It is therefor usually not beneficial to ask them questions that revolve around "is there a risk in doing....". Almost always the answer will be "yes, there is". You usually want to know not whether there are risks, but what these risks are. A lawyer can sometimes help you with that, but more often then not can't.
Your three ideas were great. I can also think of a few other things:
- EULA enforcement. Are there areas where EULA's don't apply, is
that information useful to us in any way, or is it information we want to publish?
I can answer that one for you. Sometimes they are, sometimes they are not. I'm pretty sure I've read about precedences pointing both ways. For example - an EULA where the user has a chance to read it before making the actual transaction is more likely to bind. In my eyes, an EULA that comes way after you have already started using the product, such as with the Microsoft Updates site, cannot be binding (but that's just me).
The question is therefor not whether EULAs apply, or whether any specific EULA applies. It's whether you are likely to get sued.
- Along the same lines, I'm sure most MS EULA's have boilerplate that
says, "If any part of this EULA is unenforceable, it does not affect the other parts." Are there any parts of MS EULA's that aren't enforceable because they are a monopoly? What about redistribution rights? Can the "core fonts" be packaged?
I can give you my answer to the last one. No, they cannot. You need to remember that Microsoft is likely not even the copyright owner. Also, fonts are typically protected by something called a "design patent".
We can gather some money (I think it's somewhere in the $50K area) and buy copyright and patent license for distributing them. It's been done with some Hebrew fonts and OpenOffice - you are allowed to give those proprietary fonts with OpenOffice, but only if it's a release sanctioned by Sun.
I think the more important aspect here is a moral one - these is copyrighted work. We need to respect this copyright.
-Brian
Shachar