Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

[Rjack]

David Kastrup wrote:
> Rjack <user@example.net> writes:
>
> > Hyman Rosen wrote:
> > > Rjack wrote:
> > > > The GPL is a legal delusion in Richard Stallman's marxist mind.
> > > It seems to be a solid enough delusion that Microsoft was very
> > > careful to make sure that its code would not fall under that
> > > license.
> > Why would Microsoft ever want to give away their intellectual
> > property under a voidable contract like the GPL?
> >
> > Duh.
>
> Hm?  They already distribute GPLed software.
> <URL:http://www.microsoft.com/windows/sfu>

A simple copy-and-distribute is perfectly alright under the GPL and 
is not controversial. The voidable, preempted provision of the GPL 
is section 2(b)'s modify-and-distribute term. Please demonstrate 
where Microsoft has modified-and-distributed GPL licensed code.


A federal court might not invalidate all the terms of the GPL. Some 
contracts have "severable" terms. The GPL is a bilateral contract 
with third party ("all third parties") intended beneficiaries. Since 
neither party in privity suffers detriment of consideration, the GPL 
probably has severable terms.

Sincerely,
Rjack :)

-- The GPL is not a contract and the Earth is flat. --