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

Re: Some licensing questions regarding celestia

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003, Rick Moen wrote:
> Quoting Don Armstrong (don@donarmstrong.com):
> You claimed that this "followed directly from contract law", to which
> I replied:
>    The falsity of that statement can be seen at a brief glance from
>    the fact that "a license granting unlimited unrevokable rights to
>    the public to use, modify, copy, etc." would be founded in
>    copyright law, rather than copyright law, without even considering
>    the merits of the "public domain dedications".

The forms of the license are formed and founded in Contract Law.
Contract Law is what enables you to make such a legaly binding
agreement. Licenses obey the forms of either a contract or a lease or
they are not legally valid. [At least, I have yet to year a good
argument for why they would be valid.]

The specific rights that can be restricted may be curtailed by
Copyright Law, Constitutional Law, and/or a myriad of other sections
of US Law.

Hopefully that's clear now.

> > You are absolutely correct, though, in pointing out that Copyright Law
> > plays a part in the rights that are granted to the public without a
> > License....
> The other gentleman did not say that.  Moreover, it is quite clear that
> contract law need not be involved in "the rights that are granted to the
> public without a license".


Don Armstrong

She was alot like starbucks.
IE, generic and expensive.
 -- hugh macleod http://www.gapingvoid.com/batch3.htm


Attachment: pgpAC4etoNJVY.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: