[DUG] Open source licences

[Ben Taylor]

re gpl, i think you should have a read of 

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/enforcing-gpl.html
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License

specifically the section:

------------------
The GPL is a license

The GPL was designed as a license, rather than a contract. In some Common Law
jurisdictions, the legal distinction between a license and a contract is an
important one: contracts are enforceable by contract law, whereas the GPL, as a
license, is enforced under the terms of copyright law. However, this distinction is
not useful in the many jurisdictions where there are no differences between
contracts and licences, such as Civil Law systems.

The way the GPL license works is simple, if you do not agree to and abide by the
GPL's terms you do not have permission, under copyright law, to copy or distribute
GPL licensed software or derivative works. It does not mean that the rules of the
GPL do not apply to you and that you may use the software however you like. The
default is the restrictions of copyright law, not the anarchy of the public domain.

------------------

so it looks like you disagree with copyright law.
good luck with that ;-)

b.

--- Grant Brown <grant at sitedoc.com.au> wrote:
> Hi to all,
> 
> I have kept an eye on this thread with some interest, and whilst I am 
> not a lawyer I don't believe that open source licenses of any nature 
> would stand up in court.


Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com