6 ms·
Not according to lawyers that I've had long conversations about this with. This is just how the law works. If you want to find a discussion of this topic by a
by btilly 5y ago
Not according to lawyers that I've had long conversations about this with. This is just how the law works.
If you want to find a discussion of this topic by a lawyer, a good chunk of https://rosenlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/Taxonomy-of-Licenses.pdf https://rosenlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/Taxonomy-of-Licenses... is on exactly this topic. The author of which specializes in open source licensing, and was the general counsel for the Open Software Institute.
- GoblinSlayer 5y agoYou mean bare licenses? The author mentions many times there are other possibilities.
- bdowling 5y agoThe article that btilly linked to is very good, but I think it over-emphasizes the possibility of interpreting open source licenses as contracts. You have to read pretty far and pay close attention to understand that most open source licenses will fail as contracts and that the GPL explicitly intends that result (pp. 65-66). Some consequences: (1) the sole recourse for breach of license conditions will be to sue for copyright infringement, (2) only the copyright owner will have standing to sue, (i.e., an intermediate licensee or a user, who might have standing as a third-party beneficiary under a contract theory, will not), and (3) remedies will be limited to monetary damages.