I am using the MIT License for a particular piece of code. Now, this license has

Question

I am using the MIT License for a particular piece of code. Now, this license has a big disclaimer in all-caps:

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY
OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF...
...
I've seen a normally capitalised disclaimer on the zlib license (notice that it is above the license text), and even software with no disclaimer at all (which implies, i take it, that there is indeed a guarantee?), but i'd like some sourced advice by a trusted party. I just haven't found any.

GNU's License notice for other files comes with this disclaimer:

This file is offered as-is, without any warranty.

Short and simple.

My question therefore: Are there any trusted sources indicating that a short rather than long, and a normally spelled rather than capitalised disclaimer (or even one or the other) are safely usable in all of the jurisdictions I should be concerned with?

For the purposes of this question, the software is released in the European Union, should it make any difference.

Explanation / Answer

IANAL, but one works with me. So, I asked. The result:

The caps allow you to say 'no way could they have missed the disclaimer, it is hardly fine print!' This is important in a license or EULA that non-lawyers must read and accept.

There is a difference between 'express' and 'implied'. Some areas have laws that allow people to 'imply' a warranty, even though one was not explicitly offered, unless you make certain specifications.

He suggested not making any changes to existing licenses, as that basically creates a whole new (and likely weaker) license. License proliferation is a problem. Bad license proliferation is a bigger problem.

The license is designed to protect you, and given this brave new era of endless litigation, caps and run on sentences that very few people read to begin with are a small price to pay :)

This is one of the biggest reasons why V2/V3 of the (L|A)GPL specifically say that altering the license is prohibited.

People sue, every day .. for damages that common sense should have averted. For instance "How did I know the coffee was hot? I wouldn't have spilled it on my lap if it was labeled as so .."

You really should take care not to weaken a 'shield' that prevents gold diggers from bothering you.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse I
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.