[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: The GPL means what you want it to mean

From: Rahul Dhesi
Subject: Re: The GPL means what you want it to mean
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 19:16:00 +0000 (UTC)
User-agent: nn/6.7.0

Rjack has outdone himself.

I objected to his quoting and to show
that the GPL contains illegal terms. I suggested that, since we have a
couple of hundred years or more of case law discussing when a contract
should be unenforceable due to illegality, Rjack ought to be able to
provide some case law citations. Intesad, Rjack went to and to try to prove his point.

So now he responds:

>***Rahul compared a breach of contract issue to a criminal offense:

Talk about a non-sequitor.

Rjack, I thought you said the GPL was unenforceable? But now you are
talking about a breach of contract.

I didn't compare breach of contract to a criminal offense. In fact I
didn't even mention breach of contract, since you were arguing that the
GPL was unenforceable. If I agreed that the GPL is unenforceable, it
would be silly of me to talk about the GPL being breached, even if I
agreed, and I don't, that the GPL normally causes a contract to form.

I did say that killing somebody would be an example of something being

Im still looking for some case law citations (and that doesn't mean
quotes from and :-) showing that the GPL
contains any illegal term. If you can't find any state law citations,
how about something from your previosly-favored (in the
days) authority on the common law of contracts, i.e., the Second

reply via email to

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