Followup-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps
Sender: emccoy AT katmai DOT local
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.msdos.programmer,comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Text (console) UIs for C/C++ (Linux and DOS)
References: <ai2q1i$10pqss$1 AT ID-122086 DOT news DOT dfncis DOT de> <pZc19.30286$eH2 DOT 12436140 AT ruti DOT visi DOT com> <ai3s30$10v94f$1 AT ID-122086 DOT news DOT dfncis DOT de> <874reicull DOT fsf AT toncho DOT dhh DOT gt DOT org> <8r8bkuc1cpoetmiad0c2qit4j3m4qlc6mg AT 4ax DOT com>
From: ctr2sprt AT cox DOT net (Eric P. McCoy)
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1
Message-ID: <87vg6yb13o.fsf@katmai.local>
Lines: 33
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 22:50:22 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.9.145.137
X-Complaints-To: abuse AT cox DOT net
X-Trace: news1.east.cox.net 1027983022 68.9.145.137 (Mon, 29 Jul 2002 18:50:22 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 18:50:22 EDT
Organization: Cox Communications
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Followups to cold.apps, though this has become more of a legal discussion.

Alex Pavloff <BLAHapavloff AT BLAHeason DOT com> writes:

> >> Anyone got a "No Legalese" copy of [the LGPL]?

> >Such a thing cannot exist.  Re-writing it in "simpler" language would just
> >be creating another similar license which might or might not have the same
> >effect.  Just ask your lawyer to explain the LGPL to you.  That's what you
> >would do with a commercial license you didn't understand, right? 

> I've heard this "get a lawyer to explain it to you" from numerous
> people, but how many of you got a lawyer to explain it to you in the
> first place?  Really?  

It's an averages game.  Nobody explained the LGPL to me, I read it
myself.  As I'm not a lawyer, I may misunderstand it in certain
critical ways.  But I'm betting that I understand it well enough to
abide by it, and further I'm betting that it's not cost-effective for
someone to take me to court over it.

But if my company were going to spend thousands or millions of dollars
on a product, you're damn right I'd get a lawyer to explain it to me.
More than that, I'd probably explain as much of the project as
possible to him so he could sort out any potential problems.  It _is_
cost-effective for someone to take a big company with hundreds of
employees to court.

-- 
Eric McCoy (reverse "ten DOT xoc AT mpe", mail to "ctr2sprt" is filtered)

"Last I checked, it wasn't the power cord for the Clue Generator that
was sticking up your ass."	- John Novak, rasfwrj