Re: freedomization task list [was: Re: Dangerous precedent being
tb@MIT.EDU (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes:
> Henning Makholm <email@example.com> writes:
> > That is bad enough as it is. It means that once the owner changes his
> > mind, we lose the right to make and distribute new modifications:
> > I might still have the right to make one modified copy of the work,
> > but I don't have any right to copy that one copy further.
> No, you are still confused. The copy you have you may copy. And it
> contains a license which says that it applies to further copies.
> That is binding.
The license contained in the copy is just bits. Can bits make legal
promises in American law? They certainly can't over here.
In effect, the license contained in the copy is a "recording" of a
statement the author made once in the past. Since that statement
is not itself legally binding, the recording of said statement
can't be, can it?
Henning Makholm "Slip den panserraket og læg
dig på jorden med ansigtet nedad!"