Subject: Re: claiming "licenses aren't contracts" and that...
From: "Alexander Terekhov" <>
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 21:29:30 +0200

On 10/19/07, Rick Moen <> wrote:
> Quoting Matthew Flaschen (
> > This is ridiculous.  The list is not for general copyright law
> > discussions, nor for general license discussions, nor for general
> > contract discussions.  It exists so that licenses submitted to OSI can
> > be discussed before approval.  There are obviously occasional
> > discussions unrelated that topic, but they should be kept to a minimum.
> Mr. Terekhov knows this, but finds the fact inconvenient.  See also:

To some extent it's rather unfair game on my part to respond to Mr.
Moen given his killfile filter (publicly known part), but I still
defer to Mr. Bernstein :

and once again recommend:



"To show the falsity of 'PJ''s claims, in most cases I need look no further
than Groklaw itself. 'PJ' wants more journalists to use the site as a
resource, so I'll do just that. Below are excerpts from my story that 'PJ'
says are incorrect, followed by 'PJ''s characterization of them, and my
response -- at times taken directly from Groklaw."