Re: RES: What makes software copyrightable anyway?
Raul Miller writes:
> On 5/17/05, Michael Poole <mdpoole@troilus.org> wrote:
>> My layperson's interpretation of the rationale is that since the
>> contract is specific to the parties, it defines their rights and
>> responsibilities -- within the bounds of the contract -- rather than
>> using those defined by statute.
>
> In the context of the GPL, the responsibilities have to do
> with seeing that copyright terms are granted.
>
> It's hard for me to imagine how this can make sense
> without referring to the copyright statutes.
A court can rule on whether a contract permits or forbids an action
without addressing the question of what the action later implies.
Michael Poole
Reply to: