[xmlroff] license question (nuclear facility clause)

[Tony Graham]

On Sun, Dec 23 2007 15:15:32 +0000, debacle at debian.org wrote:
> there was a discussion on this list in 2006-02, but what was the
> result? The file "COPYING" closes with the following statement:
>
> "You acknowledge that this Software is not designed, licensed or
> intended for use in the design, construction, operation or maintenance
> of any nuclear facility."
>
> Does this mean, that the copyright holder does not allow to use
> xmlroff in nuclear facilities? Or do they just not want to be
> held responsible, if the use of xmlroff will lead to a
> Chernobyl-like desaster? In the first case, this would make
> xmlroff non-free in the sense of both DFSG[1] and OSD[2].

That was the license that Sun put on it when Sun open-sourced xmlroff,
long before open source was as pervasive at Sun as it is now.

IANAL, but I have never understood that clause as prohibiting nuclear
use and have always understood it as limiting the copyright holder's
responsibility.

At the time, it was an effort to get anything open-sourced, and we were
in no position to quibble about the one paragraph of the license.

Regards,


Tony.