3 ms·
> Linus Torvalds seems to speak as though he has the power to interpret the GPL. IANAIPL but intent of the parties does generally matter to any legal analysis
by torstenvl 5y ago
> Linus Torvalds seems to speak as though he has the power to interpret the GPL.
IANAIPL but intent of the parties does generally matter to any legal analysis of an agreement. This is especially true when discussing written evidence of intent. Arguably, the discussion of GPL_ONLY could be taken to mean that those without such a marking are being granted an exception by the authors, which is perfectly well within their power to do.
https://legal.thomsonreuters.com/blog/the-parol-evidence-rule/ https://legal.thomsonreuters.com/blog/the-parol-evidence-rul...
- mustache_kimono 5y agoBut parole evidence is trickier to apply here than you might imagine. It only applies where there is an ambiguity in the text, and probably matters much less where 3rd parties are to be bound by a license, instead of two parties to a contract. Imagine, say, Microsoft (bogeyman) explaining what we really meant is that "Licensees shall give us their first born child."