off-topic discussion about permissions and promises

[Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS <edmundo@rano.org>]

Henning Makholm <henning@makholm.net>:

> > My point exactly. A typical free software licence does not constrain
> > the future behaviour of the licenser. It's not a promise.
> 
> My point is that it *is* a promise: By licencing my work under GPL, I
> promise to the world at large that anyone who subjects himself to
> certain conditions will in return be able to (automatically) obtain my
> permission to copy that particular work, and works derived for it.

Do you have any arguments to support your claim that a licence is a
promise to give permission rather than the permission itself?

Also, if the licence is not permission, what does constitute
permission, in your opinion, and how could I verify that permission
has been given as promised?

Also, how do you explain the way that licences are worded? Typially
yhey talk about "permission" and "permitted", but they don't mention
promises.

Edmund