On 1/13/06, Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Not really. I expect that any court will ignore Moglen's drivel > like the Judge Saris did in the MySQL case and will interpret > the GPL as a contract (and in this case as a breach of contractual > covenant to forbear from the exercise of the statutory right under > 17 USC 109 and instead provide access to source code as the > copyright owner decrees). My argument is that it's quite easy to > "escape" it by NOT entering into agreement.
In the case Saris ruled on, there was a signed contract. What is your basis for your claim that that aspect of this ruling is relevant in contexts without a signed contract? -- Raul
