[linux-elitists] The breadth of SCO's claims
Sat Jun 28 00:50:23 PDT 2003
I've had to be away for a few days, and am just now catching up on an
avalanche of mail, but I have to comment, here:
Quoting Aaron Sherman (email@example.com):
> However, on the flip-side, licensing is just a contract.
Nope. Most proprietary software sales are structured as contracts, for
sundry business reasons. However, the BSD, GPL, LGPL, etc. licences
operate not through contract law, but rather copyright law.
And a damned good thing that is, because otherwise they would tend to
fail contract law's required element of privity (offer and acceptance),
and possibly also that of valuable consideration.
(All your extended stuff about "sub-licensing" seems to be based on the
foregoing faulty premise, so I'll not comment further.)
Cheers, "Don't use Outlook. Outlook is really just a security
Rick Moen hole with a small e-mail client attached to it."
firstname.lastname@example.org -- Brian Trosko in r.a.sf.w.r-j
More information about the linux-elitists