Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 23:51:56 -0800 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: "Gary W. Swearingen" <swear@blarg.net> Cc: Rich Morin <rdm@cfcl.com>, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: First test of GPL in court Message-ID: <3C7DE19C.1A3CE594@mindspring.com> References: <20020227122820.A64839@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <20020227142005.A16555@energyhq.homeip.net> <20020227132417.B64839@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <20020227052928.L12253@rain.macguire.net> <3C7D1454.6957B09E@mindspring.com> <p0510032db8a31e6f3943@[192.168.254.205]> <3C7D8014.A5502797@mindspring.com> <iaofiarz0v.fia@localhost.localdomain>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Gary W. Swearingen" wrote: > Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> writes: > But many will agree, or at least greatly fear that others will agree, > that BSD type licenses are not the basis of a contract. That was one > reason the nice Python license was replaced by a monstrosity (which > still lacks obvious consideration). It does mention an "ACCEPT button". You have to wonder if the "hold harmless" constitutes consideration... [ Torte/tort ] > Well, there's a law on almost every thing else, why not on "a kind of > rich layer cake made with many eggs and little flour and usually > containing chopped nuts"? Ya learn somethin' every day. Yeah, yeah, I'm dyslexic and have problems with silent "e" when I'm typing fast. You should see it when I use whole wrong words. > Unless that was a typo for Tort Law, law about "Any wrongful act, > damage, or injury done willfully, negligently, or in circumstances > involving strict liability, but not involving breach of contract, for > which a civil suit can be brought" (ie, under Contract Law). > > I think the concept is that you'll damage me if you withdraw your > non-contract license from me after I've become dependent on it and/or > invested lots of money or effort based on having the license. I love that Intellectual Property is being treated more and more as if it were real property. Gives people a nice chance to establish a proscriptive lien through adverse use by copying a CDROM, and the company not coming to their home and enforcing against the adverse use, after which the people have "established an interest". Like when I park in front of your house for 20 years, and you have to let me park in front of your house forever after. > Black's costs $. How about this from "Bouvier 1856"? > > A bare license ... being without consideration, may be revoked at > pleasure, as long as it remains executory; 39 Hen. VI. M. 12, page > 7; but when carried into effect, either partially or altogether, it > can only be rescinded, if in its nature it will admit of revocation, > by placing the other side in the same situation in which he stood > before he entered on its execution. 8 East, R. 308; Palm. 71; > S. C. Poph. 151; S. C. 2 Roll. Rep. 143, 152." This is interesting. This could be interpreted as saying that revocation was not possible after the preparation of derivative works. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C7DE19C.1A3CE594>