For Approval: GPLv3

[Eugene Wee]

Matthew Flaschen wrote:
> Where exactly does GPLv2 say explicitly it is not a contract?  The
> situation hasn't changed at all in GPLv3.  As far as I know, the FSF
> stills views it as a license, but this isn't directly stated in either
> license.

Lawrence Rosen (Open Source Licensing, 2005) pointed to sections 5 and 
2b of GPLv2 to back up his statement that the GPLv2 "wants nothing of 
acceptance or consideration" and hence the "GPL authors intend that it 
not be treated as a contract".

Regards,
Eugene Wee