John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I would not be surprised to have a court hold that "restricted" in this > instance applies solely to government restrictions, and that contractual > restrictions (such as agreeing to a license) are still permissible, since > nobody forced the company to agree to that restriction.
Maybe so. But a free software license is not a contractual restriction. In the US, the courts look very disfavorably on any agreement that prohibits you from telling the truth publicly. Some are indeed enforced, but they are read very strictly. > Using the broader interpretation, you would find, for instance, that NDAs > are unenforcable. No, merely that an NDA which relied on the free-software style of license would be unenforceable. One that actually involved a *contract*, with a *signature*, might be different.
