Proposal for P2P disclaimer text

[Marc Mutz]

On Sunday 14 March 2004 20:59, Waldo Bastian wrote:
> Just don't expect any sympathy or support if you end up in court due
> to your own negligence.

Your comment is completely beside the point.

Well, if NoSE wants to pay lawyers to scan hundreds and thousands of 
patents for whether or not KMail infringes on any one of them, so be 
it. I doubt it. I for one lack the financial support needed for this, 
and even if I didn't, I'd think of it as a waste of resources.

As I said, disclaimers such as those presented here can do more harm 
than help. It's quite hard to convince a judge of their validity if 
they disclaim stuff you knew beforehand. They raise the impression that 
you only tried to cover your ass with them, not stand to them.

And that is exactly the case here. It's like distancing yourself from 
warez sites and at the same time maintaining a warez link list.

Marc

-- 
It is truly ironic that the United States, once the beacon for
promoting the principles of freedom of expression, is now
systematically infecting other countries with this dangerous public
policy choice [the DMCA] that will restrict more speech than any law
before it.    -- EFF FTAA Alert:
                 Stop Hollywood Forcing Technology Ban on 34 Countries
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-policies/attachments/20040315/816709b6/attachment.pgp