From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_40 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 9 Jan 93 11:26:56 GMT
From: newsflash.concordia.ca!nstn.ns.ca!dragon.acadiau.ca!841613t@uunet.uu.net 
 (Don Tyzuk)
Subject: Re: New Arcadia/IRUS AFLEX-AYACC release
Message-ID: <1993Jan9.112656.7973@dragon.acadiau.ca>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

firth@sei.cmu.edu (Robert Firth) writes:

>I forget but you can look it up.  The distributor was a pharmaceutical
>company that gave free sample of its products to doctors as a means
>of advertising them.  When one of them killed a patient, the company
>argued just that - there was no implied warranty because no sale.
>They lost.  The issue is not whether you charge for the product, but
>the fact that you distribute it.

I also do not play a lawyer on t.v.,  but I pretend I am one
in arguments that don't belong here anymore... :-)
But, that won't stop ME from adding to it!

The pharmaceutical company is in the business  of selling the
product.  There is a business relationship there, even if the
company gives away the sample.

The distribution of GNU (and similar work) is the publication
of an academic work.  If I write a paper on how to achieve
cold fusion in a snowbank, and you try it and it doesn't work:
then you are simply reading my shoddy research and trying to
replicate the results.

I would say that distribution of this software is simply
publication of academic work.
-- 
don.tyzuk@acadiau.ca