Re: Intellectual Property II

[Alexander Terekhov]

Alexander Terekhov wrote:
[...]
> http://gplv3.fsf.org/av

Transcripts:

http://www.ifso.ie/documents/gplv3-launch-2006-01-16.html

------
This would not be a presentation about the GPL by me if emphasis was not
placed on what you see before you now. This license is

"Not a Contract.

You are not required to accept this License in order to receive a copy
of the Program."

We have not argued now, nor will we, nor can anyone argue, who reads the
text of the language, that the receipt of the code is some quid-pro-quo
for the acceptance of some terms. If you are existing in a legal system
in which that wasn't what made it a contract, then ...go with God, but
arguments based on the contractual exchange of the code for promises of
compliance have nothing to do with us. We give permissions here and the
enforcement weight of our license lies in the fact that you have no
permission to propagate, that is, you have no permission to do what
copyright law requires permission to do, but through this license.
That's our legal theory and we are sticking to it. 
------

Got it? 

ROFL.

regards,
alexander.