Re: Help to pick a license for my free source code project

[Rui Miguel Silva Seabra]

On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 12:17:52PM -0400, rjack wrote:
> No contract ever binds anyone unless you accept it -- that's a 
> tautology.

Since licenses aren't contracts, there's nothing for you to see here.
Even if it was considered a contract, and since not signed not
valid, then effectively absolutely nothing would allow you to
distribute copies you make.

> When a *licensee* accepts the GPL "contract" by modifying and 
> distributing it he promises to:
> 
> "cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or 
> in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part 
> thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third 
> parties under the terms of this License."

Yada yada yada yada

It's still *You* who are bound to distribute under those terms.
The third parties will receive the copy from *You* under those
terms, not from *Me*.

> As to your habitual and obnoxious accusations of "liar" I can 
> only observe:

> When replying to a legal argument or belief supported by 
> reference to applicable legal principle or citation to case 
> precedent, attacking the character of the person advancing the 
> argument i.e. calling them a "liar" renders the reply irrelevant.

You lie about the GNU GPL. About law I don't know, but once you're a
liar, one never really trusts your word... You lie about the GNU GPL
in order to work around it's letter and spirit in order to fit the
laws you want it to fit.

I didn't accuse you of lying about any legal principle or case law,
so you're still lying (by pretending I called you a liar on subjects
I did not).

Rui

-- 
Umlaut Zebra �ber alles!
Today is Prickle-Prickle, the 70th day of Bureaucracy in the YOLD 3173
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?