The IBM Public License
Rick Moen
rick at linuxmafia.com
Mon Aug 16 18:33:24 UTC 2004
Quoting dlw (danw6144 at insightbb.com):
[much snipped]
> Any open source license that does not preserve this identity for
> privity of contract purposes would be unenforcable under contract law
> after first distribution. A legal party identity requirement such as
> this might have saved the GPL , although enforcement would vary under
> differing state law requirements. (The IBM license stipulates New York
> State).
>
> In SCO v. IBM, IBM attempts to save the GPL's lack of privity by calling
> it a "conscious public covenant" or "public trust" because legal trusts
> do not require privity:
Same answer as before, Daniel: GPL is simply not a contract. Among
other things one might notice:
The "Program", below, refers to any such program or work, and a
"work based on the Program" means either the Program or any
derivative work under copyright law:
Therefore, to object that it lacks necessary contractual element [foo]
is to fundamentally miss the point.
Give it up, already.
--
Cheers, The cynics among us might say: "We laugh,
Rick Moen monkeyboys -- Linux IS the mainstream UNIX now!
rick at linuxmafia.com MuaHaHaHa!" but that would be rude. -- Jim Dennis
More information about the License-discuss
mailing list