On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 5:02 AM, dsimcha <dsimcha@yahoo.com> wrote:
> == Quote from Walter Bright (newshound1@digitalmars.com)'s article
>> Having been involved with occasional contract disputes, I concur that the simpler and more obvious the language is, the better (and the lower your lawyer bill is :-) ).
>
> A perfect argument for the WTFPL!

As I understand it, in some places a warranty on software is implied if not specifically disclaimed.  That's why such disclaimers can be found in just about every software license.  I am not a lawyer, but I heard this from a lawyer.

--bb

dsimcha wrote:
> == Quote from Walter Bright (newshound1@digitalmars.com)'s article
>> Having been involved with occasional contract disputes, I concur that
>> the simpler and more obvious the language is, the better (and the lower
>> your lawyer bill is :-) ).
> 
> A perfect argument for the WTFPL!

Yeah, but imagine a big lawsuit involving the WTFPL. There'd be a huge court case about what the F-word means. It'd be hilarious.