Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

[amicus_curious]

"Rahul Dhesi" <c.c.eiftj@XReXXCopyr.usenet.us.com> wrote in message 
news:go0i73$nuv$2@blue.rahul.net...
> Rjack <user@example.net> writes:
>
> [ still arguing promissory estoppel ]
>
> > > How do you get promissory estoppel without a promise?
>
> > "2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion
> > of it...
>
> Permission alone is not a promise.  What is the writer of the GPL
> promising to do or not to do?
> --
The leap here is the phrase "thus forming a work based on the Program".