Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 3) Is it actually possible for a license (as opposed to a signed contract) > > to restrict use? My understanding was that copyright law was all about > > copying. > > See the GPL language on this - something like "you haven't signed this > contract, but you have no other license to copy or use the software.". > > IMO you can grant rights while restricting other rights that the user > would have had _without your grant_. They have the choice of accepting > your contract or not.
They've not written their license in this fashion -- it's perfectly legal to distribute a copy of the Zope editor to someone without charge (without a contract). So the recipient of such a copy is not bound by any such additional contract. The copyright license is still relevant if the recipient wishes to make copies of the Zope editor, but that's not the issue we're talking about. [This is why we don't need a special "no button" clause in the DFSG -- such clauses are not legally binding. We may want to add a more general clause, however, to reject licenses which claim rights which don't belong to the copyright holder.] -- Raul
