Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/20/2010 9:31 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
With one court

And how many court decisions have supported the crank point of view while addressing open licenses?

Absolutely none. Nada. Zip. Nicht.

There is *no* legal definition of what an "open" license is, other than
the legal certainty that *all* copyright licenses are contracts to be
interpreted under the state law of contracts.

There is absolutely no legal difference between "open" and "proprietary"
copyright licenses. The same rules of contract construction apply
uniformly to both.

RJack :)
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to