* Daniel Hazelton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > My experience with german courts has shown me that the judges I had
> > to deal with always and foremost did apply a reality check and did
> > not try to bisect the consequences like an algorithm evaluated by a
> > machine, i.e. the tried to decide what is right and wrong and not
> > whether the letter of the contract could be twisted this or that
> > way.
>
> This is the way it should be. However, the letter of the contract, in
> this case, is very clear and that hasn't stopped Herr Welte at all.
btw., still ianal, but the GPLv2 is not a "contract" but a "pure
copyright license". A contract, almost by definition is a restriction of
rights in exchange for consideration - while if you accept the license
of a GPLv2-ed work this act only gives rights that you did not have
before. Furthermore when you get source code of free software then there
is no "meeting of minds" needed for you to accept the GPL's conditions,
and only the letter of the license (and, in case of any ambiguities, the
intent of the author of the code) matters to the interpretation of the
license, not the intent of the recipient. (while in contract cases both
the meeting of minds is needed and the intent and understanding of both
parties matters to the interpretation of the contract.)
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
