Hyman Rosen wrote:
> On 4/20/2010 4:55 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > "Breach of Third-Party Beneficiary Contract
> > [1] Elements and Case Citations
> > (1)   Defendant and a third-party entered a valid contract;
> > (2)   Plaintiff is not a party to the contract;
> > (3)   The parties to the contract intended that the contract primarily
> > or directly benefit plaintiff or a class of parties of which plaintiff
> > is a member;
> > (4)  The contract is breached;
> > (5)  Plaintiff suffered damages as a result of the breach.
> Why are you describing this? 

Because that's the right way to enforce third-party beneficiary
contracts, silly Hyman.

> no such suits with respect to the GPL or other open licenses.

And thus no enforcement and hence no compliance, you retard.


"News: SFLC Finds One New GPL Violation Per Day"



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