Licence question about Indemnification

[Unknown W. Brackets]

That is a very common clause.  The idea, as far as I understand, is that 
if the compiler were to break - and your client were to sue you because 
of this - you can't sue down the chain.

 From the same directory, readme.txt:

"The optimizer and code generator sources are
covered under a separate license, backendlicense.txt.

It does not apply to anything else distributed by Digital Mars,
including D compiler executables."

Theoretically, this could mean you are safe.  However, to be sure, I am 
an individual unlearned in the law, and therefore legally unable to give 
you anything anyone might construe as legal advice.

For questions such as these, your best bet is to ask your lawyer.

-[Unknown]


Chris wrote:
> Greetings to all !
> 
> I am evaluating D language for my next project (and immediatly loved
> it),  but went to a screetching halt on the following licence term:
> 
> "You agree to defend, indemnify and hold Digital Mars and Symantec, its
> subsidiaries, affiliates, directors, officers, employees and agents
> harmless from all claims or demands made against them (and any related
> losses, damages, expenses and costs) arising out of your use of the
> Software."
> 
> I feel the statement "arising out of your use" is too broad in scope, and
> ecompassing even the _legitimate_ use of the compiler.
> 
> For example let's say that I wrote an antivirus in D, and come to be a good
> product; if Symantec lose some market share of their similar product, since
> the product was made "out of my use of the Software", do I have to
> "indemnify" them?
> 
> The clause apparently cover even the demands from an unrelated third party,
> simply because "arise out of my use" of the software; let's say that I
> made a security network tool, and discovered some vulnerabilities in
> Symantec (or any affiliates) products. Let's say that they had many loss due
> to imdenification requested by their customer, or simply by bad review in
> press; do I have to refound they under that clause?
> 
> The licence term apply even to "subsidiaries" and"affiliates", which can be
> companies that are in my businnes (but not the some businnes of Digital Mars
> or Symantec) and obviously my competitor. With above clause they have a
> weapon against me.
> 
> I am pretty sure the licence term intended to protect from
> over-responsabilities, but ended to say a very different thing.
> 
> Thank you for your time. 
> 
>