Re: How long is it acceptable to leave *undistributable* files in the kernel package?

[Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com>]

Michael Poole wrote:

> Brian Thomas Sniffen writes:

<snip>

>> It's a unilateral license.  It can't mean anything but what he intends
>> it to mean.
> 
> Reference, please?  That is Alice in Wonderland logic ("Words mean
> exactly what I want them to mean, neither more nor less.").  I hope
> that a license means what is written.

With a unilateral license, the license grantor's interpretation is given a
great deal of weight by the courts (because he is granting something out of
the goodness of his heart and receiving no compensation).  The license
recipient is getting a free gift, so his interpretation is generally given
very little weight (provided the grantor has made the grantor's
interpretation clear).  Obviously the grantor can't claim that the license
means something totally contrary to what it says, but any interpretation
within reason will probably be accepted.

This is in contrast to interpretation of contracts, where neither party is
preferenced.  But note that if all parties to the contract agree, a third
party's interpretation is likely to be ignored, even if technically more
correct.

Sorry I don't have the references, but you can look them up for yourself.

-- 
There are none so blind as those who will not see.