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

Re: GPL v3 Draft

On 2/14/06, John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 04:01:05PM +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > But we all know that the GPL is a license-not-a-contract, and so UCC
> > and related case law simply doesn't apply.
> Do we?  I thought that a license was a contract.

Everyone who is neither blind nor an idiot knows for certain that the
GPL is a *LICENSE NOT A CONTRACT* -- Richard Stallman and Eben Moglen
have clarified that fact at least a hundred times.


"> [... ICE MILLER lawyers in Wallace v FSF: "the contract controls" ...]

 If Moglen doesn't fire them he has some serious explaining to do to
 thousands of people on why he misled programmers and companies on the
 legal nature of the GPL -- he is, after all, a Professor of Law and
 lead counsel for the FSF.

 "This right to exclude implies an equally large power to license--that
 is, to grant permission to do what would otherwise be forbidden.
 Licenses are not contracts: the work's user is obliged to remain
 within the bounds of the license not because she voluntarily promised,
 but because she doesn't have any right to act at all except as the
 license permits."

 http://emoglen.law.columbia.edu/publications/lu-12.html "

                                                 -- day5done

Reply to: