Rjack has outdone himself. I objected to his quoting answers.com and merriam-webster.com to show that the GPL contains illegal terms. I suggested that, since we have a couple of hundred years or more of case law discussing when a contract should be unenforceable due to illegality, Rjack ought to be able to provide some case law citations. Intesad, Rjack went to answers.com and merriam-webster.com to try to prove his point.
So now he responds: >***Rahul compared a breach of contract issue to a criminal offense: Talk about a non-sequitor. Rjack, I thought you said the GPL was unenforceable? But now you are talking about a breach of contract. I didn't compare breach of contract to a criminal offense. In fact I didn't even mention breach of contract, since you were arguing that the GPL was unenforceable. If I agreed that the GPL is unenforceable, it would be silly of me to talk about the GPL being breached, even if I agreed, and I don't, that the GPL normally causes a contract to form. I did say that killing somebody would be an example of something being illegal. Im still looking for some case law citations (and that doesn't mean quotes from answers.com and merriam-webster.com :-) showing that the GPL contains any illegal term. If you can't find any state law citations, how about something from your previosly-favored (in the pre-answers.com days) authority on the common law of contracts, i.e., the Second Circuit? -- Rahul http://rahul.rahul.net/ _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
