Sometimes, things that are made of legal fiction are held to operate as normal even when someone attempts to disobey them.
For example, I can browse a web site and agree to its terms, or I can not browse the web site, but it seems I can't browse the web site but not form the TOS contract, even if I am willing to accept the consequences of not having permission.
Does this same principle apply to copyright law? If a license is attached to something saying that anyone may copy it provided that they pay a fee much larger than the damages for copyright infringement, and I copy it, can the licensor declare that I agreed to the license and therefore owe the fee? Or can I say I rejected the license and am only responsible for the damages?
Or similarly, can source code that is distributed to you and contains GPL code be considered to have automatically been licensed to you under the GPL? Or is it possible to receive code that should have been but still is not actually licensed to you under the GPL, because the distributor rejected the GPL and chose to commit copyright infringement instead?