Slashdot Mirror
Should the GPL be Used as a Click-Wrap?
swillden asks: "I've come across an increasing number of GPL programs lately that display an EULA-style click-wrap agreement during installation. While not exactly wrong, this seems like a bad idea to me, since it perpetuates the idea that you must agree to some arbitrary set of conditions in order to install and use a piece of software. In this case the conditions are very liberal (there are none, really), but still it reinforces the notion that you can't install a package unless you agree. The FSF says that such click-wrapping is neither required nor forbidden but it seems like a bad idea to promote the click-wrap meme, even if the license is user-friendly. Does Slashdot have strong thoughts on this matter?"
And you are an idiot. The copyright laws certainly cover copying, that's why they are called COPYright laws. The act of downloading and running the program is COPYING. If the GPL does not grant you this right, then you are doing it illegally, because nothing else grants you that right, either. By your logic, downloading and burning a copy of Windows XP is legal, as long as I don't enter into a contract with Microsoft. That's not the way it works.