"Thufir Hawat" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 21:55:46 +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
"Thufir Hawat" <[email protected]> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:[email protected]...
On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 16:17:58 -0400, amicus_curious wrote:
If EULA are contracts, what makes the GPL different from other EULA,
in your view?
It is not any different at all. Both are contracts.
Now, what do you think happens when such a contract is breached?
IANAL, are you?
IANALs also have a right to think, y'know.
The GNU land is hilarious brain-free zone: "thinking will not be
tolerated."
The typical response when an EULA is ignored by an end user is that the
company, it's usually a company, goes after the user on copyright
infringement, so far as I know.
That is rarely, if ever, done in the case of an individual user. Where the
use is substantial and commercial, the BSA is commissioned to hunt down the
perpetrators, certainly, but, unlike the RIAA, individuals are not being
pursued for personal use. That may change, but it has not been the case so
far.
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
