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

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:


Got it now, silly?


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'

(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

Reply via email to