From: "Alex Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > That's not strictly true in many jurisdictions, including the UK, and > it's also not true to say that all distribution of GPL'd software would > necessarily preclude consideration in either direction.
I would actually say this is strictly untrue in many jurisdictions. At least in many with civil codes, a contract is not an exchange of considerations, but some kind of mutual agreement that creates an obligation. For instance, donations are contracts under this regime, and if I agree to donate something to you, in normal circumstances, I can't simply revoke it. > I'm not saying the original author is distributing under the terms of > GPL, just that if they claim to do that but fail to perform, recipients > may have some kind of recourse. I suspect there are at least 3 approaches to give action to the recipient. One is to say that the GPL is a contract and creates an obligation on the granter to fulfill it. A second one is to say the information given by the granter is a public offer, and when accepted by the recipient binds the granter to fulfill the conditions of the offer (GPL). A third is the doctrine of non-negation of one's own acts. This means that if you give me a licence to enter your home, for instance, you can't then deny your own act and sue me for entering your private property. --David. ---AV & Spam Filtering by M+Guardian - Risk Free Email (TM)--- _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list [email protected] https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
