[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!"

From: Rjack
Subject: Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!"
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 20:02:19 -0500
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20081209)

Rahul Dhesi wrote:
Rjack <> writes:

As the United States Supreme Court unequivocally stated, ..."It
goes without saying that a contract cannot bind a

Can a person a non-party lawfully distribute GPL software?

I don't understand your question about a "non-party".

By *definition* someone who distributes GPL software is a party to
the GPL contract of adhesion.

You accept the non-voidable terms of the GPL by copying and/or
distributing any code proffered to you under the license.

Rjack :)

reply via email to

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