why does allowing click-through licenses "just feel wrong" to me?

[John Cowan]

Rod Dixon scripsit:

>  To prove consent, you need not show that
> the license/contract was negotiated.  Non-negotiated contracts do exist and
> include many mass-market software licenses. 

Indeed, the overwhelming majority of contracts actually executed are
not negotiated.  Every time you buy something in a store, a contract is
formed and executed, but the seller dictates its terms.

> I am unclear what you mean when you say "permission notice;" you could mean
> copyright license, but that would make your argument a bit circular.

I think the GPL is unusual because it is a *conditional* copyright license;
it says "You have a license to do A, B, and C provided you also do D, E,
and F."  Most copyright licenses are restricted but unconditional:
"You may make copies of this work by including it in every copy of
your magazine named Y", e.g.

-- 
John Cowan                                <jcowan at reutershealth.com>     
http://www.reutershealth.com              http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Yakka foob mog.  Grug pubbawup zink wattoom gazork.  Chumble spuzz.
    -- Calvin, giving Newton's First Law "in his own words"
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3