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

Re: Bug#317359: kde: ..3'rd "Help"->"About $KDE-app" tab calls the GPL "License Agreement", ie; a contract.

On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 04:55:30PM -0700, Sean Kellogg wrote:
> All true...  except you can't put in a legal contract "This is X" when in fact 
> it is a Y.  The law, while often blind, is not that blind.  Consider "Work 
> for Hire," saying something is a Work for Hire in an employment contract will 
> not make something a Work for Hire, no matter how much both actors may want 
> it to be a Work for Hire.  Its a matter of conduct.  I suggest the same goes 
> for licenses and contracts.

I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with, though.  The GPL says it doesn't
cover use; it goes on to list a bunch of restrictions, and none of them
cover use.  Is your line of reasoning "the only way, in many jurisdictions,
the warranty disclaimer could be effective is if it was a condition of use,
therefore it is one, and the second paragraph of 0 is completely false"?

> I also agree that copyright doesn't cover use, but use can be controlled via 
> contract

I know; that's why I referred to the second paragraph of 0: "The act of
running the Program is not restricted".  I don't know how the warranty
disclaimer can be interpreted as a "running the program is only allowed if
you agree to this warranty disclaimer" clause, no matter how preferable
it might be, when the license explicitly states that running the program
isn't restricted.

> That's an interesting place to arrive, but I can't fault it logically.  You 
> seem to be suggesting it is more advantageous to consider the GPL a pure 
> license, thus negating the warranty disclamers (which must be both 
> conspicuous and agreed to if they are to be binding) thus exposing the author 
> and distributors to potentially billions of dollars in damages, rather than 
> just call the GPL a contract.  Strikes me the more advantageous thing to do 

It seems that this is an expected place for a licensee would arrive,
especially combined with the FSF's trumpeting of "the GPL is not a

Glenn Maynard

Reply to: