[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: More FSF hypocrisy

From: Rahul Dhesi
Subject: Re: More FSF hypocrisy
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 21:54:20 +0000 (UTC)
User-agent: nn/6.7.0

Rjack <> 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?

reply via email to

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