Re: Sharing the GPL source code, with value addition by vendor specifictohis hardware?

[David Kastrup]

Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:

> RJack wrote:
>> 
>> On 10/13/2010 9:30 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
>> > Hyman Rosen<hyrosen@mail.com>  writes:
>> >
>> >> On 10/13/2010 8:17 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
>> >>> Hey Hyman how is the progress to get the source code for a
>> >>> refurbished Insignia player you so badly needed some time ago,
>> >>> silly?
>> >>>
>> >>> <chuckles>
>> >>
>> >> Nothing yet. This is, of course, why the SFLC is still pressing
>> >> its suit against Insignia. If it gets to trial, Insignia will be in
>> >> the rather odd position of having promised to comply with the GPL
>> >> in its manual. Sounds like promissory estoppel to me.
>> >
>> > Promissory estoppel is a defense, not a complaint.
>> >
>> 
>> Really?
>> 
>> Google <"promissory estoppel is a cause of action">.
>
> Poor dak should go directly to
>
> http://everything2.com/title/gratuitous+promise
>
> "In the case of promissory estoppel, the party trying to weasel out of
> an agreement is "estopped" from asserting any of the usual defenses to a
> contract: no agreement in writing, lack of consideration, that sort of
> thing.

So just try to remember _who_ is trying to weasel out of an agreement.

-- 
David Kastrup