On 5/19/05, Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 5/19/05, Michael K. Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The GPL is anomalous in that the drafter has published a widely > > believed, but patently false, set of claims about its legal basis in > > the "FSF FAQ". > > For the record, I disagree that this faq is "patently false". > > It is, in places, a bit simplistic, but I wouldn't advise anyone > delve into those fine points of law unless they've retained > the services of a lawyer (at which point the FAQ is merely > an interesting commentary -- it has less weight than > professional advice).
The FAQ is not merely an "interesting commentary" -- it is the published stance of the FSF, to which its General Counsel refers all inquiries. Although I am not legally qualified to judge, I believe that he can have no reasonable basis under the law in his jurisdiction for many of the assertions that it contains, particularly the assertion that the GPL is a creature of copyright law and not an ordinary offer of contract. That may yet become a problem for him personally as well as for the FSF. This is not a "fine point of law", it is first-year law student stuff that anyone with a modicum of familiarity with legalese can easily verify for himself or herself by the use of two law references (Nimmer on Copyright and Corbin on Contracts) found in every law library in the US. These law references are probably also available from most law libraries in any English-speaking country and the bigger ones anywhere in the world, as are their equivalents for other national implementations. The fact that all licenses are (terms in) contracts is also blatantly obvious from a few hours' perusal of the primary literature -- statute and appellate case law -- which is available for free through www.findlaw.com. Don't believe me; look it up for yourself. > Furthermore, that FAQ is far and away better than anything > you've proposed. If that is a challenge to produce an adequate summary of my writings to date on the topic, I think I'll take it up, in my own sweet time. It won't be legal advice (IANAL), but it will be firmly grounded in the applicable law to the best of my ability, which is a hell of a lot more than you can say for the FSF FAQ. Cheers, - Michael