Re: [O] [RFC] Move ox-koma-letter into core?

[Rasmus]

Viktor Rosenfeld <address@hidden> writes:

> Hi Tom,
>
> Am 17.02.14 22:56, schrieb Thomas S. Dye:
>
>> FWIW, as a small businessman, the indemnification clause looks fairly
>> standard to me.  The contracts for archaeological services that we
>> routinely sign typically have a clause like this, usually coupled with a
>> request for a certificate of insurance that specifies the levels of
>> liability insurance that the business carries.
>>
>> As I read the clause, FSF is in the position of accepting 1) a code
>> contribution from a developer, and 2) the developer's assurance that the
>> contributed code can't be claimed as property by a third party.  It
>> seems prudent that, in the event of a successful property claim by a
>> third party to a piece of code contributed by a developer, the developer
>> who gave the false assurance should be held responsible. Otherwise, FSF
>> might be brought down by copyleft opponents who knowingly contribute
>> code to which others have property rights in order to create a basis for
>> lawsuits.
>
> Thanks for your reply. I was hoping to get some feedback on how other
> Orgmode contributors see this issue (although this list is obviously
> self-selective). The problem I have is that I'm not a lawyer or a
> businessman and not a native English speaker. I do know enough though
> not to lightly sign documents I don't fully understand.

Perhaps FSFE would be able to shed some light on the issue (EU-based).
Or Software Freedom Conservancy (US-based).  I don't have further
insights.

—Rasmus

-- 
May contains speling mistake