Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/9/2010 2:54 PM, RJack wrote:
You can't accept illegal terms... the law refuses to enforce them.

Fortunately the terms of the GPL are legal.

Oh beautiful estoppel! Wondrous are your ways! You maketh my code public domain! Oh fair estoppel!

There is no estoppel with respect to the GPL since the GPL clearly spells out the requirements for allowing covered code to be copied and distributed. That an anti-GPL crank believes the permissions of
the GPL apply while the requirements do not simply confirms that
person as a crank, but does not impact the GPL at all.

Crank this Mr. Denier:

"To apply the doctrine of promissory estoppel, the proponent must
demonstrate: (1) a clear and unambiguous promise; (2) reasonable and
foreseeable reliance by the party to whom the promise is made; and (3)
an injury sustained in reliance on the promise (see NGR, LLC v General
Elec. Co., 24 AD3d 425 [2005]). Estoppel requires detriment to the party
claiming to have been misled (see Nassau Trust Co., 56 NY2d at 184).";
New York Supreme Court, Kings County Docket No. 2009-04019

RJack :)
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to