Re: freedomization task list [was: Re: Dangerous precedent being
Sorry, for answering so late, but amount of debian-legal messages
is so huge, that I have not find enough time to read it until now.
On 20 Dec 99, at 14:48, Raul Miller wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 19, 1999 at 11:16:56PM +0100, Marketa Ceplova wrote:
> > 1) Consideration is defined by my old Emanuel Outlines for Contracts as
> > "detriment to promisee bargained for", which certainly is nothing which
> > author of free software receives.
>
> Why? [I'm interested in seeing if you can come up with an explanation
> which corresponds to the definition which does not also exclude normally
> accepted contracts.]
The idea is probably (very roughly) that only non-gratuitous (e.g.
mostly business) promises are to be enforced by the law (promise
of present is typically non-enforceable under the US law, isn't?).
Therefore only the promises which are parallel detriment to
promisee are honored.
I am not sure, whether there is any detriment to author of free work.
> You're not required to accept a contract, but if you want to receive
> the benefits of one you must abide by it.
There is a lot of legal systems (and I am not exactly sure with the
one of your state), that requires for example knowledge of offer
being accepted in order to protect contract (i.e., the Czech one --
see http://www.volny.cz/cepls/ ).
Have a nice day
Matthew
Reply to: