Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: JBoss aquired by Red Hat]
From: Bernard Lang <Bernard.Lang@inria.fr>
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 15:14:27 +0200

> From: Jim Thompson <jim@netgate.com>
> 
> There is probably a case to be made that the person entering into the  
> contract via assent to the existence of Santa Claus was either a) a  
> minor (or in the mental state of a minor) or b) incompetent to enter  
> into the contract or c) understood the contract to be non-enforceable  
> for this (or other) reasons.
> 
> The GPL was "invented" as a hack on copyright law, not contract law.   
> Distribution is copying.

my point is that the clicking may be unrelated to what the GPL enforces.

the GPL is enforceable anyway.

> 
> I agree that Corel's term(s) of distribution were likely a GPL  
> violation.

Not at all ...  it would be if it attempted to prevent downloaders to
give it away to people under 18.  But to put restrictions on whom you
give it to, or how, could breach some laws, but not the GPL. The GPL
does not force anyone to give back his modified code (unlike some
other copyleft licences). It only forces you to sell/give it away
under the GPL, if you do.


> On Apr 29, 2006, at 4:03 AM, simo wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 10:09 +0200, Bernard Lang wrote:
> >> What about this situation :
> >>
> >>
> >>      This software is licensed under the GPL.
> >>      Click *HERE* to assent to the existence of Santa Claus
> >>         and download the software.
> >>
> >> Did I sign a contract ?
> >
> > For the US law probably yes, as there is specific legislation (or  
> > common
> > law) if you ask assent.
> > Does it mean it is always a contract?
> > I do not think so, but then I am not a lawyer.
> >
> > I can say that in Italy for example there is strong concern about this
> > point because for the Italian law "license" is not something that  
> > exists
> > in legal terms, so we end up trying to fit the GPL in so called-
> > unilateral-contracts, but even this is difficult, because the law  
> > there
> > specify exactly which are the admissible unilateral-contracts, and the
> > GPL seem to not fit any easily.
> >
> >> Anyone can distribute GPLed code, under any condition.
> >> Corel made Linux available to people over 18 years old exclusively.
> >>
> >> so what  ?
> >
> > This was probably a violation :-)
> > The GPL explicitly state that you cannot restrict distribution.
> >
> > Simo.
> 

-- 
             Le brevet logiciel menace votre entreprise
               Software patents threaten your company
    Soutenez la Majorité Économique - Support the Economic Majority
                  http://www.economic-majority.com/

Bernard.Lang@inria.fr             ,_  /\o    \o/    Tel  +33 1 3963 5644
http://pauillac.inria.fr/~lang/  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  Fax  +33 1 3963 5469
            INRIA / B.P. 105 / 78153 Le Chesnay CEDEX / France
         Je n'exprime que mon opinion - I express only my opinion