Alexander Terekhov <[email protected]> writes: > David Kastrup wrote: > [...] >> Actually, they aren't, because the GPL is not a contract. But > > The German courts records clearly confirm the obvious fact that the > GPL is a contract.
It is mostly held to contractual standards once the parties _both_ agree on making use of the license. In contrast to a contract, clauses ruled as invalid don't invalidate the rest of the license (assuming absence of salvatory clauses), and there can be no contractual penalties for non-compliance. Apart from those considerations, the concerned law is contract law. If those considerations don't concern the case, the ruling is not distinguishable from one about contracts. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
