|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 13 2013 @ 02:26 AM EDT |
I don't "want" him to be wrong. He may well be right as far as the US
is concerned, and that may be the only jurisdiction in which such a distinction
could actually make a difference, although I can't claim to be certain that it
does. Contract or licence grant, the real issue is enforceability before the
courts, and I don't think that that can be questioned any more.
Not that it matters, but I respect Prof. Moglen's work and have heard nothing
but good things about him from friends and colleagues of of mine who know him
professionally. I haven't had the pleasure yet. If you're looking for an axe,
I'm sorry to disappoint you, but I have none to grind.
I'm not sure why you're asking about my qualifications. Nowhere have I claimed
"to know more than he does". I do have "qualifications",
both in software development (including some small contributions to open source
projects) and in law (not in the US), but they are not at issue here. Your
subtle argumentum ad auctoritatem is both meritless and makes me think that you
feel threatened. You shouldn't.
I have been reading Groklaw since the radio userland days (not quite so often
these days as years past), although I post very infrequently and value my
anonymity so I try not to give away too many details about myself. To be
honest, I have often been deterred by the way you have treated others who,
having some expertise, have reasonably disagreed with you where you would brook
no disagreement. I expect you will delete this thread now as you have done with
the others, including those which have cited US caselaw that tends to support an
understanding of the GPL as a contract. I wish you wouldn't, though. There is
no FUD here.
You used to be proud of the international nature of the community you have drawn
here, yet whenever this topic comes up you seem to want to limit the discussion
to the US. I feel that in so doing you are doing a disservice to everyone who
reads here.
I'm not sure why you feel the need to engage in ad hominem, either. Perhaps
you could address the merits of the argument or explain why you think that the
GPL can't be both a grant of licence and a unilateral contract at the same time
instead? Licences are generally granted by way of contract, after all. What do
you think?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
