Re: non-enforcability of the BSD advertising clause
John Goerzen <email@example.com> 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
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.