[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: GNU licenses

From: Alfred M. Szmidt
Subject: Re: GNU licenses
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 12:20:57 +0200 (CEST)

   >    The "not paying $1 per copy" is not part of the authorized
   >    act. The contract establishes two acts: 1) One party
   >    authorizes the other party to copy 2) The other party accepts
   >    the obligation to pay for each copy
   > Of course the "not paying $1 per copy" is part of the authorised
   > act.  That you insist on listing them as two sperate things is
   > completely irrelevant.

   We're not getting through to each other. How do I say this without
   getting into a "is too/is not".

But "is too/is not" arguments are so much more fun!!

   When we enter into a contract that says "you may copy, at cost of
   $1 per copy", then we both have an obligation as a result. I have
   to tolerate the copying, you have to pay $1 for every copy.

Yes, but this is a copyright license, not a contract.  So contract law
isn't relevant here.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]