Re: More FSF hypocrisy

[Thufir Hawat]

On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 19:32:52 -0400, Rjack wrote:

> Thufir Hawat wrote:
>> On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 11:09:32 -0400, Rjack wrote:
>> 
>>>>> IF A COPYRIGHT LICENSE EXISTS, ITS LANGUAGE WILL BE INTERPRETED AS A
>>>>> CONTRACT IN DETERMINING ITS COVENANTS FOR PURPOSES OF BREACH AND
>>>>> THEN EXAMINED FOR LANGUAGE DETERMINING SCOPE FOR PURPOSES OF
>>>>> INFRINGEMENT.
>>>> 
>>>> Assuming this is so, what's your point?
>>> The point of an original newsgroup post seems to evolvs with the
>>> number of posts to the thread. I think we were discussing legal
>>> enforcement of the GPL.
>> 
>> 
>> If EULA are contracts, what makes the GPL different from other EULA, in
>> your view?
>> 
>> 
> The GPL contains unenforceable terms.


When other EULA are ignored by the end users, the response is typically 
copyright infringement, right?


-Thufir