On 3/16/2010 12:40 PM, RJack wrote:
If you choose not to avail yourself of the permissions granted by the
GPL, then you are not bound by it. The Supreme Court says that a
contract cannot bind a non-party. Both of these things are
simultaneously true. You seem very confused. Certainly if you choose
to accept the permissions of the GPL then you license the covered
work at no charge to all third parties under the GPL,
In defiance of the Supreme Court ruling.
No, in accordance with the Supreme Court ruling. If you choose to
accept the permissions offered by the GPL, then you become a party
to it, and must obey its conditions.
but that does not bind the third parties to anything unless they too
choose to accept the permissions of the GPL.
If they are not bound then you haven't *caused* "all third parties to
be licensed" (which is impossible anyway) and thus have not satisfied
the GPL requirements.
You have, by copying and distributing the covered work along with
the GPL, which specifies that you are granting this license to all
third parties.
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
