You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to legal-discuss@apache.org by "Karan, Cem F CIV USARMY RDECOM ARL (US)" <ce...@mail.mil> on 2018/08/10 13:08:50 UTC

RE: [Non-DoD Source] RE: Maven Central terms of service

>Wheeler, David A:
>
>For more discussion about the *Apache* license and the US federal government's
>antideficiency act, see my post: "Antideficiency Act and the Apache License"
>at Caution-https://www.dwheeler.com/blog/2012/06/27/
>
>Phil Odence:
>> After much wrangling (as I
>> understand it) they got comfortable based on the indemnification only
>> applying to redistributed software; the Army had no plans to redistribute
>> whatever this was....
>> (I remember the question crossing my mind as the
>> whether firing a missile counted as distribution of the embedded software.)
>
>The issue isn't redistribution per se.  What the Army should have realized
>(and I suspect eventually did) is that the Army was not required to indemnify
>without further action, so the Apache license indemnification clause would
>never be triggered.
>
>The US government's executive branch is *quite* allergic to indemnification
>clauses.  Since they're all over the place, they cause endless headaches.
>Think of indemnification clauses as a full employment act for US government
>lawyers :-(.  There are special separate negotiated agreements with GitHub,
>SourceForge, Twitter, Facebook, Google, and so on to deal with this.  For more
>info, see: Caution-https://help.github.com/articles/amendment-to-github-terms-
>of-service-applicable-to-u-s-federal-government-users/ Caution-
>https://ben.balter.com/2015/01/26/the-fine-print-nobody-reads/
>
>Karan, Cem F CIV USARMY RDECOM ARL (US):
>> So... if the source code was on the missile at the time, would that satisfy
>> the terms of the license?
>> Morbidly curious...
>
>I don't think firing a missile at someone counts as a "delivery" to them in
>the software development sense :-).
>
>--- David A. Wheeler

Are you sure?  It might just be an updated version of RFC 1149 
(https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1149) ;-)

Thanks,
Cem Karan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org