On 14 Dec 1999, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > Contracts require consideration to be taken as valid contracts. Mere > promises are not legally enforceable. However, the right to copy the > software is most certainly consideration. There is no requirement > that the consideration be tangible; intangible goods are fine.
This is a very interesting thought. What if you reverse it? The *author* of the software receives no consideration from the person the software is distributed to. I am suddenly very afraid of this. > The GPL is also not a contract, it's a public license. This I suppose would make a difference... I hope :}
