On 14/11/2007, Matthew Brown <morven(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 14, 2007 1:00 PM, Kwan Ting Chan
<ktc(a)ktchan.info> wrote:
Which to my understanding says that if you distribute an open source
project you have in effect agreed to the license, which is a form of
contract, and if you breach the license it is not copyright
infringement but breach of contract.
This is definitely early days as far as getting legal precedent for
open source licensing, but it's interesting.
Yeah, that's my understanding as well. By that logic, if I go into
Woolworths, pick up a Mars bar and walk out, it's not theft, it's
breach of contract and the most they can do is send the bailiffs
rounds to collect the 30p. If you can be bound by a contract without
ever agreeing to it, then clearly the reasoning is flawed.