Richard Kenner wrote:
You really are NOT a lawyer (or at least I would presume that from what
you are writing). Much of the above is just WAY off!
I am not a lawyer, but there is still no contract. No parties to the
supposed contract, no consideration, no meeting of the minds.
Yes, that's right, which is why I and others are trying to tell you
that the file COPYING doesn't constitute a license (which *does*
require a "meeting of the minds").
This is very tedious.
A license does not require the meeting of minds.
The actual license is often word-for-word
identical, but it is provided in a context in which there *is* such
a relationship between the parties. If no such relationship exists, you have
no legal right to use the software.
Despite the lack of a relationship with anyone at FSF, many people do
download GPL software an use it, in accord with the license. They have
a legal right to use the software.
--
Michael Eager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
1960 Park Blvd., Palo Alto, CA 94306 650-325-8077
