Re: The GPL dream is finally over!

[Rjack]

Tim Smith wrote:
> In article <cIudnS0z0OcfXzvVnZ2dnUVZ_oHinZ2d@giganews.com>,

> However, first you have to have a contract.  With an offer looking to 
> form a unilateral contract, it is offeree's performance that acts as 
> acceptance of the contract.  If offeree does not perform, as specified 
> in the offer, there is no acceptance, and hence no contract.

I have heard it rumored that there are a least a few people (offeree's) 
who desire to use GPL'd code for their projects or to use Linux as their 
operating system. For that tiny minority (I doubt if there are more than 
a few million participants) the GPL becomes a contract when they 
download (copy to their hardrive) GPL'd code (i.e. GPL sec. 1. "You may 
copy and distribute. . .").

If you believe GPL sec. 5 then you also probably believe that the tooth
fairy rides on the back of a flying pig.

 "5. You are not required to accept this License, since you have not
signed it.  However, nothing else grants you permission to modify or
distribute the Program or its derivative works.  These actions are
prohibited by law if you do not accept this License.  Therefore, by
modifying or distributing the Program (or any work based on the
Program), you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so, and
all its terms and conditions for copying, distributing or modifying
the Program or works based on it."

Sincerely,
Rjack


-- [A] condition precedent is a condition precedent to performance
under the contract, not formation of the contract. When a
condition precedent is not satisfied, it relieves a party to the
contract of the obligation to perform. It does not negate the
existence of the contract or the binding contractual relationship
of the parties."; Moratzka v. United States (In re Matthieson),
63 B.R. 56, 60 (D.Minn.1986) --