On 4/21/2010 9:28 AM, RJack wrote:
Hyman Rosen wrote:
Where do you see any distribution to "all third parties"? You are just
amazingly confused.
"You must cause any work that *YOU DISTRIBUTE* or publish, that in whole
or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof,
to b
Hyman Rosen writes:
> On 4/21/2010 9:28 AM, RJack wrote:
>> Hyman Rosen wrote:
>>> Where do you see any distribution to "all third parties"? You are just
>>> amazingly confused.
>>
>> "You must cause any work that *YOU DISTRIBUTE* or publish, that in whole
>> or in part contains or is derived fro
Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/20/2010 10:41 PM, RJack wrote:
And the rights holders are excluded as beneficiaries of the GPL
contract. The distribution is to other "all third parties".
What in the world are you talking about?
"23. Under the License, Mr. Andersen grants certain permissions to
other
On 4/20/2010 10:41 PM, RJack wrote:
And the rights holders are excluded as beneficiaries of the GPL
contract. The distribution is to other "all third parties".
What in the world are you talking about?
"23. Under the License, Mr. Andersen grants certain permissions to other
parties to copy, mo
Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/20/2010 4:55 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
"Breach of Third-Party Beneficiary Contract [1] Elements and Case
Citations (1) Defendant and a third-party entered a valid
contract; (2) Plaintiff is not a party to the contract; (3) The
parties to the contract intended
Hyman Rosen writes:
> You are very confused.
I don't think he is confused at all. It's all quite deliberate. He's
trolling.
--
John Hasler
jhas...@newsguy.com
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI USA
___
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.o
Hyman Rosen wrote:
>
> On 4/20/2010 5:20 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > Because that's the right way to enforce third-party beneficiary
> > contracts
>
> But the GPL is not a third-party beneficiary contract,
> it's a simple copyright license. You are very confused.
I'm not confused, you're
On 4/20/2010 5:20 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
Because that's the right way to enforce third-party beneficiary
contracts
But the GPL is not a third-party beneficiary contract,
it's a simple copyright license. You are very confused.
___
gnu-misc-discu
Hyman Rosen wrote:
>
> On 4/20/2010 4:55 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > "Breach of Third-Party Beneficiary Contract
> > [1] Elements and Case Citations
> > (1) Defendant and a third-party entered a valid contract;
> > (2) Plaintiff is not a party to the contract;
> > (3) The parties to t
On 4/20/2010 4:55 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
"Breach of Third-Party Beneficiary Contract
[1] Elements and Case Citations
(1) Defendant and a third-party entered a valid contract;
(2) Plaintiff is not a party to the contract;
(3) The parties to the contract intended that the contract prim
"Breach of Third-Party Beneficiary Contract
[1] Elements and Case Citations
(1) Defendant and a third-party entered a valid contract;
(2) Plaintiff is not a party to the contract;
(3) The parties to the contract intended that the contract primarily
or directly benefit plaintiff or a class
11 matches
Mail list logo
