[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ldp-es_20002103-7_i386.changes REJECTED



On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 06:54:07PM +0000, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote:
> Henning Makholm <henning@makholm.net>:

> > There's a school of thought that says that an old free licence *can*
> > be retracted in common-law countries, because of the "consideration
> > theory" which basically says that unilateral promises cannot be
> > enforced against the person making the promise.

> I have heard of this principle in the context of contract law, but a
> licence isn't a contract.

And what is it if not a contract?  It is not a "license" as issued by a
regulatory body.  Contract law governs all agreements between civil
parties that aren't otherwise constrained by law.

> Also, I find the idea of a licence being enforced against the licencer
> somewhat odd. It's not as if the recipient of a free licence would try
> to sue the licenser.

Why else do you think licenses have disclaimers of warranty?

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: pgphM4jT9QowG.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: