Hyman Rosen wrote: > > On 4/13/2010 10:07 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > > Notice "was licensed" in > > It is only anti-GPL cranks (and lawyers who need to raise > every possible defense) who believe that one may accept the > permissions of a license while refusing its obligations.
Hot, hot, hot, Hyman! Promises are made to be broken, therefore the contract laws provide the remedies. The contract laws recognize a concept called "efficient breach" which *encourages* breach of (enforcable) obligations if it's economically efficient to do so. Compliance with contract obligations is almost always voluntary -- if you choose not to comply, then you don't have to. You merely have to compensate the non-breaching party for his expectancy interest. Hint: damages. See also: http://www.jus.unitn.it/cardozo/review/Contract/Alpa-1995/alpa2.html Got it now, silly? regards, alexander. P.S. "Every computer program in the world, BusyBox included, exceeds the originality standards required by copyright law." Hyman Rosen <hyro...@mail.com> The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' P.P.S. "Of course correlation implies causation! Without this fundamental principle, no science would ever make any progress." Hyman Rosen <hyro...@mail.com> The Silliest GPL 'Advocate' -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
