Re: GNU License, Again

[Alexander Terekhov]

David Kastrup wrote:
> 
> Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:
> 
> > David Kastrup wrote:
> > [...]
> >> put forward by typical case law, is shere lunacy.  It is to the best
> >> interest of the FSF to claim the full extent of this lunacy for their
> >> interpretation of copyright law and the GPL.
> >
> > I have yet to see *any* references to case law by GNUtians to back
> > their utterly lunatic interpretation of copyright law and the GPL.
> 
> Well, that cuts both ways.  And the typical proprietary software
> licenses (which go widely unchallenged) make demands that are quite
> more atrocious.  

This is called "freedom to contract" (the courts of course 
routinely deem some contract terms as "unfair" and don't enforce 
them).

>                 There is a general tendency by large law departments
> not to question the status quo.  You may partly want to call it FUD if

You are confusing freedom to contract with idiotic GNUtian 
"interpretations" of copyright law (non-binding opinion) and
convoluted and ambiguous to boot wording of the GNU GPL (which is
to be construed AGAINST drafter-grantee).

regards,
alexander.