gnu-misc-discuss
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Problem with GPLv3 FAQ about linking with Visual C++


From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Problem with GPLv3 FAQ about linking with Visual C++
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 18:25:59 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.90 (gnu/linux)

Alexander Terekhov <address@hidden> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote:
>
> [... snip dak's hallucinatory considerations ...]
>
>> Apart from those considerations, the concerned law is contract law.  
>
> Dak, repeat ten times:
>
> THE GPL IS A CONTRACTUAL INSTRUMENT (AKA 'IS A CONTRACT').

First part right, second wrong.  It is a contractual instrument.  It is
not a contract.

> http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/contractual-instrument.html
>
> "contractual instrument   
>
> Definition
>
> Formal document establishing a contractual arrangement."

Why do you think do they have different dictionary entries for
"contract" and "contractual instrument"?

As contrasted to a contract, we don't have a binding agreement between
two parties.  The second party retains the choice of accepting the
terms, and the first party does not have the option to sue for breach of
contract.

That way we just have a contractual arrangement, not a contract.

-- 
David Kastrup


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]