Tatsuki Makino wrote:
>> Hello.
>> What I say may turn out to be bullshit :)
>> 
>> In short, it doesn't matter what the license is, it's how it controls
>> 
>> Can the FreeBSD installer include built packages?
>> Can packages be included on FreeBSD installer disks sold on the FreeBSD 
>> Mall (
>> https://www.freebsdmall.com/ ) ?
>> When the distfile fails to download, can it be downloaded from 
>> MASTER_SITE_BACKUP?
>> 
>> If there are no matching licenses, I think we can concoct new licenses and 
>> control them.
>> I don't know if it's just a good example, but I think
>> print/epson-inkjet-printer-escpr2 is applicable to the example where the 
>> license
>> clause is included in the distribution file, and audio/libamrnb is 
>> applicable to
>> the example where the license clause is not included in the distribution 
>> file.
>> 
>> It's a surprisingly difficult part that needs to be done accurately, so if 
>> I'm
>> saying something wrong, please point it out right away :)
>> 
>> Regards.
> I think you site 2 excellent examples. But in the end, isn't the onus upon 
> the
> creator(s) of the software/source to clearly site TOU -- terms of use?
> IOW with reasonable diligence, which might be a cursory look through the 
> source,
> in an effort to find those terms. 1) Should that search return a clear 
> answer; fine,
> problem solved. 2) Should that search turn up multiple options, with no 
> clear answer/
> winner. Choose any, or a text description summarizing the overall 
> (perceived) intent.
> 3) Should that search return no results. Choose TOU/LICENSE UNKNOWN.
> 
> Point being; a producer of an app/software should/can  not require an 
> end-user/distributor
> to be well-versed in the prevailing law(s) of their place of citizenship. 
> Nor to be an
to be well-versed in the prevailing law(s), as they pertain to software, of 
their place of
citizenship. Nor to be an
(speaking of Due Diligence, a better proof reading wouldn't hurt.)
> attorney/barrister, in order to use their software. Unless, of course, it is 
> only
> intended for such use.
> 
> So the answer is clearly best/reasonable effort on the individual in 
> possession of
> said software/source. Best, or Reasonable is in the interpretation of the 
> individual
> in possession of said software/source.
> 
> --Chris