In article <377CCC9F.ABD88220@ledanet.com.au>, cco### [at] geocitiescom wrote:
>The line from Yahoo themselves seems to be that the "broad" language is
>required to allow them to better host/mirror the sites, and in this vein
>the references to "adapt, publish, translate..." and "technology now
>known or later developed" could be seen simply as allowing them to
>reformat pages for WebTV/spoken word browsers, etc.  On the other hand,

Something that needs to be remembered is that even if a creator "trusts"
Yahoo not to take advantage of the broad license in other than "nice"
ways, ownership changes, and changes in ownership tend to transfer
contractual obligations (caveat: I am not a lawyer). Anyone who agrees to
those terms with Yahoo could well find themselves having agreed to those
terms with Microsoft, America On-Line, Sony, or AT&T later on. (Not saying
specifically that one of those are bad, just trying to include enough
corporations in the list that any individual creator might be scared of at
least one of those owning a perpetual irrevocable sublicensable license to
use their creations.)j

Management changes also need to be taken into account.

Jerry

Post a reply to this message