<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 12:40 AM, Richard Fontana <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:fontana@sharpeleven.org" target="_blank">fontana@sharpeleven.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im">On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 01:35:44PM +0000, Gervase Markham wrote:<br>
> Some licensing documents disclaim e.g. the application of the United<br>
> Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods. Do<br>
> they have good reason to do so,<br>
<br>
</div>I don't actually know. I confess that as far as I can recall I've<br>
never looked at that Convention. The most coherent argument I have<br>
heard from a lawyer on this point was something to the following<br>
effect: 'no one really knows what's in that Convention, or whether it<br>
applies to software, but whatever is in it might be bad' (paraphrasing<br>
heavily of course). I think the main reason we see this being excluded<br>
is because someone initially decided to do so and this started a<br>
process in which lawyers drafting licensing agreements all followed<br>
suit.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div style>FWIW, that's my understanding too. But we may have gotten our understanding from the same person. :-) </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im"><br></div>
<div class="im"><br>
> * "or "powered by" statements"<br>
><br>
> Is this too specific, or are we hoping a judge would understand this as<br>
> referring to a class of statements? E.g. if there was a "FooBar Inside"<br>
> statement instead of "Powered by FooBar"...<br>
<br>
</div>This is just a clarification of what kinds of things absolutely are<br>
not 'Legal Notices'. It isn't meant to be exhaustive, but I did<br>
recently add 'Powered by statements' because that is such a common<br>
form in which I've seen the problematic condition.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div style>When Gerv raised this, I wondered why the word "trademarks" isn't in there. When I suggested adding "trademark legends" I'm SURE I had a good reason not to add "trademarks," but for the life of me I can't figure it out now. Maybe I was thinking about the case where a name is also a trademark, so in the copyright notice the company name would also be trademark? But that seems a silly thing to worry might get misinterpreted.</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>So if no one else can think of a good reason not to say "trademark," doesn't it make sense to say "<span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);white-space:pre-wrap">but does not include logos, </span><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);white-space:pre-wrap">other graphical images, _trademarks or_ trademark legends[, or "powered by" statements]." That will take care of all the "powered by," "built on," "inside" statements. </span></div>
<div style><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);white-space:pre-wrap"><br></span></div><div style><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);white-space:pre-wrap">Pam</span></div></div></div></div>