Managing commercial risks in open source software licensing

Legal context: The article reviews the commercial risk allocation clauses intypical open source licence terms and discusses their enforceabilityand implications. Key points: The enforceability of warranty disclaimers and limitation ofliability clauses in common open source licence terms is questionable,particularly in a cross-border context, and commercial licensorsshould take additional steps to protect themselves from down-streamrisks. Practical significance: Open source software presents a number of unusual commercialissues, because it is available free of charge and the providerstry to disclaim warranties and liabilities. End users and resellershave to adjust their own in- and out-licensing models to accommodatethis situation.     

Book Review International Environmental Negotiations: The Current State of Empirical and Analytic Study

Negotiation Journal -     

Teaching Students How to Use Emotions as They Negotiate

Given that emotions are inescapable and complex, how do you teach students how to deal with them? This article offers instuctors a practical approach. It suggests that instructors and students turn their attention away from emotions and toward a more limited set of core emotional concerns that stimulate many emotions. The article describes ways to teach students how to use these core concerns as tools to understand the emotional terrain and to stimulate helpful emotions.     

Are disturbed and normal adolescents equally competent to make decisions about mental health treatments?

This study uses a structured vignette procedure to assess competency to make treatment decisions in two groups of adolescents, one at risk for institutional placement and the other a matched community sample. Scores on Factual Understanding (the ability to recall facts), Inferential Understanding (the ability to make inferences about those facts), and Reasoning (the ability to weigh risks and benefits of various treatment options and to make choices based on that reasoning) were compared. Results showed that while at-risk adolescents and their community, counterparts did not differ in their factual and inferential understanding abilities, the at-risk adolescents did significantly less well than the community adolescents in reasoning. This difference could not be fully explained by differences in verbal IQ. Girls, no matter what their risk status, scored higher than boys on the Reasoning scale. Implications for legal policies concerning adolescents are discussed.