Re: OpenSSL and GPLed programs
"Chloe Hoffman" <chloehoffman@hotmail.com> writes:
> I don't see how "contract issues are entirely moot". Certainly at
> least the terms of the license must be interpreted to determine if
> they are complied with. AFAIK copyright law does not deal with such
> issues. Rather contract law has a long established tradition for
> interpreting and defining unilateral "contracts". I would be
> interested to see cites otherwise. I am talking U.S. law here but
> would be interested in laws of other countries as well.
It's not a contract. It's a license. Your description of a long
established tradition is entirely correct: it's the tradition of how
to interpret grants of permission (which are operative in cases of
copyright, trespass, and so forth). That tradition is *not* contract,
and calling it "contract" again and again only serves to confuse the
issue.
> Also, I am not convinced that most "open source" licenses are not
> contracts.
I don't know about "most". I know about particular ones, and they
aren't.
> My view is that a good argument can be made that that a
> licensee, in consideration for receiving the right to modify,
> distribute, etc the code and in consideration for foregoing the right
> to sue the licensor (limitation of liability) accepts the license
> contract by modifying, distributing, etc. the code. Indeed if it were
> otherwise, the limitation of liability would have no effect because
> the public license model you propose is unilateral.
The absence of any negotiation makes very clear that it isn't
contract. The limitation of liability is defensible on entirely
different grounds.
> Well I think I know a little bit of law as an attorney. I hoped I was
> providing useful information. I'd be happy to go away if you prefer.
You seem out of your depth here. A tax attorney, for example, may be
exceedingly good at his job and still be totally out of his depth when
it comes to the details of the criminal law: a detective probably has
a better knowledge of the elements of most serious crimes than does a
tax attorney.
I've been engaged in issues of free software IP law for over a decade,
and I know the subject inside and out. And I'm not the only one on
this list; there are many such.
Thomas
Reply to: