Re: freedomization task list [was: Re: Dangerous precedent being

[William T Wilson <fluffy@snurgle.org>]

On 14 Dec 1999, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:

> Contracts require consideration to be taken as valid contracts.  Mere
> promises are not legally enforceable.  However, the right to copy the
> software is most certainly consideration.  There is no requirement
> that the consideration be tangible; intangible goods are fine.

This is a very interesting thought.  What if you reverse it?  The *author*
of the software receives no consideration from the person the software is
distributed to.  I am suddenly very afraid of this.

> The GPL is also not a contract, it's a public license.

This I suppose would make a difference... I hope :}