Re: freedomization task list [was: Re: Dangerous precedent being
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.
Yes, but I was thinking the other way around: the author of the
program does not necessarily get any consideration out of putting
his program under the GPL (which ought to count as a promise to
enter the described contract with anyone who accepts the conditions).
So, legally, what prevents an American author from telling CheapBytes
"sorry, I changed my mind so foobar is not GPLed anymore. Would you
please destroy all of your CDs or pay a license fee to me?"
> The GPL is also not a contract, it's a public license.
Huh? Are "public licenses" a sui generis case in American law?