Re: GPL and linking
[geez, this branch was still spamming d-d too]
On 5/11/05, Raul Miller <moth.debian@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/11/05, Michael K. Edwards <m.k.edwards@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 5/11/05, Raul Miller <moth.debian@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Of course, a court case does not have to be argued that way.
> > No, but if it's to have a prayer of winning, it has to be argued in
> > terms of the law that is actually applicable, not as if the court were
> > obliged to construe the GPL so that every word has meaning and then
> > proceed directly to copyright law.
>
> The law as written says that you do not have permission to copy
> except as granted by a license. Thus the GPL's license grant
> is not only applicable, it's the issue which is most likely to be
> contested in such a case.
Except for all the other times that you have permission to copy, as
defined in the applicable statute and case law. Which is not the
point here anyway; the point is that it's an offer of contract, not a
statute and not some magical creature of copyright law, and that means
you are analyzing it from utterly the wrong angle and cannot possibly
arrive at correct legal conclusions. (IANAL, TINLA.)
Cheers,
- Michael
Reply to: