Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Anonymous still tries to appeal to intellect... > > ------ > GPL validity isn't a package deal > Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, September 23 2006 @ 05:03 AM EDT > > The parties have already agreed between them that the distributor > can distribute the software.
Uh, no. There is no agreement, no signature, no exchange of considerations _unless_ there is a written contract that the distributor has a right to distribute. Once the distributor has in some manner acquired a _right_ to get the material licensed to him, he can protest any clauses that that are "unfair" in as much as they can't be reasonably expected as a part of the licensing obligation. However, the commone GPL usage case does _not_ involve a right to licensing, but rather a licensing _gift_. Take it or leave it. When I develop GPLed software for customers of mine, the construction we usually use is that they get licensed to do with the software more or less at their behest, while we have an understanding that I am free to license the software to others like I want to, including licensing under the GPL. It would be possible that I'd license the software strictly under the GPL to my customers, too. In _that_ case, if the GPL provisions make it impossible for them to use the software as intended when we made the contract, they could claim that unfair terms can't be enforced by me. But in the normal case, where there is no contractual relationship between licensor and licensee, or any obligation of licensor to licensee, this argument does not fly. In that case, it is "take it or leave it". -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
