Excerpts from danceswithcrows's message of Wed May 06 11:41:52 -0700 2009: > > On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 12:53 AM, Andrew "Tuna" Harris wrote: > >> - Nobody with the company that produces the proprietary software > >> may say the word "plinth" out in public. > > This would also be interesting. But would it be enforceable? ISTR > that there are plenty of problems with unenforceable contracts, and > a judge who didn't like you or hadn't been paid off might use that as > a means to declare the license invalid. Then again, IANAL. > Well my mom talked to her lawyer-friend about the terms of my license today. He thinks that it could be valid. He said that these contracts do require action on somebody's part, and this is a reasonable enough condition.
> From: Alex Dean <a...@crackpot.org> > > "It is alleged that, on April 1 2015, Defendant did knowingly and with > > malice aforethought duplicate software programs and code licensed by > > Plaintiff, and did expressly failed to comply with Subsection 3.2.15 > > (Chicken Dance), commonly referred to as the 'Dancing Clause'. > > Plaintiff seeks relief in the immediate performance of said Dance by > > Defendant." > > Then it'd be available in the public record. Neat. I wonder how much > silliness would happen if, say, the next release of libtiff was only > available under the Chicken Dance License. > --------------------------------------------------- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
