Copyright lawyer advises "be careful" using Python?

[johnzenger at gmail.com]

I was scanning the 9/13/2006 issue of the "Electronic Commerce & Law
Report," which is a newsletter for lawyers published by BNA.  They have
an article headlined "Game Developers Making Tomorrow's Hits Face Host
of Copyright Issues Along the Way," and the article is mostly a writeup
of a speech given by Paul Tauger, identified as "an IP attorney with
Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis LLP, San Francisco."  It contains this
final paragraph:

"Be Careful Using Open Source Tools.  Game developers are under
constant pressure to deliver games under tight deadlines.  Open source
software tools can help speed the development process, but may carry
with them certain legal risks, Tauger explained.  One open source tool
popular with the game development community is Python.  Unfortunately,
the Python Software Foundation's license agreement leaves a lot of
unanswered questions about the origin and precise ownership of the
tool's code.  The license refers to six separate entities that, at one
point or another, contributed to the tool's development.  PSF's license
disclaims any warranties of non-infringement and disavows any
indemnification obligation.  In theory, if some aspect of Python was
deemed to infringe copyrighted code, it could create legal headaches
for game developers who rely upon the tool to build certain parts of
their games.  'Be aware of the risks attendant,' Tauger said."  (page
914)

What is our response?  Is the PSF that much different from any other
open source license?  Can anyone identify everyone who ever contributed
to the Linux source code?  Does ANY free "tool" indemnify people?  In
fact, does Microsoft indemnify Visual Studio users against the risk
that one day the BASIC language will be found to have been infringing a
patent all along?