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

Re: Some licensing questions regarding celestia

Quoting Don Armstrong (don@donarmstrong.com):

> The forms of the license are formed and founded in Contract Law.

You are mistaken.  There is nothing about the described situation that
requires or suggests a contract.

In fact, most open source / free software licences (for example) have no
dependency whatsoever on contract law, and apply in accordance with the
mechanisms of copyright law regardless of whether a contract forms
between any parties involved.  Which is a good thing, since otherwise
there would be serious problems in the areas of privity and (arguably)

> Contract Law is what enables you to make such a legaly binding
> agreement. 

That is irrelevant to the question.  Licences based in copyright law do
not require an "agreement".

> Licenses obey the forms of either a contract or a lease or they are
> not legally valid.

That is false.  Please read, for example, GNU GPLv2.

> 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.

That is correct but irrelevant to the question.

> Hopefully that's clear now.

Clear but incorrect.  Not that I can fault you for anything other than
refusal to look at the specifics on account of preconception:  Yours is
a very common mistake among those new to open-source licensing.

Cheers,                     Chaos, panic, & disorder - my work here is done.
Rick Moen

Reply to: