Speaking generally, the vast majority of writing I've seen about "bare licenses" that aren't also contracts comes from theory, and particularly early, FSF-affil

Speaking generally, the vast majority of writing I've seen about "bare licenses" that aren't also contracts comes from theory, and particularly early, FSF-affiliated theory. Not practice. Not courts. There was activist fear about the dark power of contract law, as opposed to just copyright. And some political lobbying about the kinds of rules copyright owners should be able to impose and enforce under copyright law. They wanted to distinguish EULAs and NDAs—contract, bad—from licenses—good. Arguably, Moglen and friends were overtaken by legal decisions on both fronts. Nimmer, our go-to treatise on copyright law, more openly acknowledges the deep links between copyright and contract law. Despite the fact that in the US, copyright law is federal (national) law and contract law is primarily state law. For the vast majority of people and firms, all of this is political trivia.