Re: non-enforcability of the BSD advertising clause
John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> writes:
> I would not be surprised to have a court hold that "restricted" in this
> instance applies solely to government restrictions, and that contractual
> restrictions (such as agreeing to a license) are still permissible, since
> nobody forced the company to agree to that restriction.
Maybe so. But a free software license is not a contractual
restriction.
In the US, the courts look very disfavorably on any agreement that
prohibits you from telling the truth publicly. Some are indeed
enforced, but they are read very strictly.
> Using the broader interpretation, you would find, for instance, that NDAs
> are unenforcable.
No, merely that an NDA which relied on the free-software style of
license would be unenforceable. One that actually involved a
*contract*, with a *signature*, might be different.
Reply to: