[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: CAFC 2008-1001 -- "license to the world must be a bare license" case

From: rjack
Subject: Re: CAFC 2008-1001 -- "license to the world must be a bare license" case
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 08:42:18 -0400
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20080213)

Alexander Terekhov wrote:

OSI's General Counsel contemplates upcoming "disaster for open source
licensors" and brings attention to another recent case

Is reality finally setting in?

Observe the enormous amount of “spin” applied to the current presidential candidates and then fire up Google and look for “open source” blogs that are actively discussing the Netbula, LLC v. Storage Technology decision. Any parallels?

The so-called open source “community” has expended an enormous effort during past years spouting crass propaganda concerning the “power” of open source licensing. The biggest lie of all was the chanting of the mantra “a license is not a contract”.

By evading this fundamental legal principle – that all license are contracts – any cogent discussion of open source licensing principles and possible benefits has been subverted by anti-capitalist political ideology.

Any open source "disaster" has been openly engineered by the propaganda folks at OSI and the FSF.

Rjack :)

 --- Whether this [act] constitutes a gratuitous license, or one for a
reasonable compensation, must, of course, depend upon the circumstances; but the relation between the parties thereafter in respect of any suit brought must be held to be contractual, and not an unlawful invasion of the rights of the owner."; De Forest Radio Tel. & Tel. Co. v. United States, 273 U.S. 236, United States Supreme Court (1927) ---

reply via email to

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