[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: SFLC is SOL
From: |
Hyman Rosen |
Subject: |
Re: SFLC is SOL |
Date: |
Tue, 04 May 2010 16:14:55 -0000 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091204 Thunderbird/3.0 |
On 4/13/2010 10:37 AM, RJack wrote:
Hyman you bandy about the term "open license" as if it is a special,
exceptional category of copyright license -- it isn't.
Open licenses are special, since they are offered unilaterally
by licensors without communication or agreement with licensees.
ALL copyright licenses WITHOUT exception are simply contracts to be
interpreted under the States' common law of contracts:
Rather, when it comes to understanding rights and obligations
under a license, the issues involved are identical to contract
law, so licenses are construed as contracts for purposes of
analysis.
- Re: SFLC is SOL, (continued)
- Re: SFLC is SOL, Hadron, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC is SOL, amicus_curious, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC is SOL, David Kastrup, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC is SOL, Rex Ballard, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC is SOL, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC is SOL, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC is SOL, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC is SOL, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC is SOL, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC is SOL, RJack, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC is SOL,
Hyman Rosen <=
- Re: SFLC is SOL, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC is SOL, David Kastrup, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC is SOL, RJack, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC is SOL, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC is SOL, RJack, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC is SOL, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC is SOL, RJack, 2010/05/04
Best Buy countersues SFLC gang, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04