Re: [hackers-il] Idea: Worm with EULA
- Adi Stav wrote:
>IANL, but I think we got a little mix up here:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 04:07:28PM +0200, Chen Shapira wrote:
> > > When did you see an open source product forcing you to
> > > agree to an EULA? :)
> > They usually ask me to agree to a GPL or other license.
> > GPL is no warranty too.
> The GPL is a copyright license and not a contract, and is therefore
> "binding" regardless of whether you agree to it or not. The GPL says
> as much inside it. Therefore, asking for users to click on the GPL
> carries no legal weight, although it might well serve other purposes.
Copyright to a piece of work, such as software belongs to the person who
wrote the program or paied for the copyright (such as the employer of
the person who wrote the program).
No other person or legal entity has the right to make use (copy, use,
distribute) the copyrighted work (let's leave fair use behind for a
This is true for ANY software, closed, open or free.
The EULA is a *contract* that you sign or agree to, which states that in
exchange for you complying to specific terms the copyright holder has
set forth (be it to give him money and not reverse engineer the program
or the terms in he GPL or what have you) you will get a premission from
the copyright holder to use the program (usually) or to extra stuff with
it (e.g. GPL and friends). This contract is called a license.
You don't have to agree to a license, jsut like you don't have to sign
any contract, but without doing so, you don't get the copyright holder
premission to do whatever it is the EULA says you can do if you agree.
The same mechnism is at work whether this is the MS-Word EULA or the
GPL, only the terms of the contract are different. Simple, isn't it?