Re: More FSF hypocrisy

[Rahul Dhesi]

Rjack <user@example.net> claims that promissory estoppel would be
a defense to copyright infringement of a GPL-licensed work because
of the following alleged promise:

>"You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion
>of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and
>distribute such modifications or work. . ." It's called a promise
>for a grant of rights.

Doesn't promissory estoppel requires reasonable reliance on a promise?

Why is it reasonable to rely on an out-of-context fragment?
-- 
Rahul
http://rahul.rahul.net/