View mode: basic / threaded / horizontal-split · Log in · Help
March 22, 2009
Re: eliminate writeln et comp?
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
March 23, 2009
Re: eliminate writeln et comp?
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.
Next ›   Last »
2 3 4 5 6
Top | Discussion index | About this forum | D home