Hot answers tagged

22

No. GPL works are copyrighted (as are most creative works basically everywhere in the world, as soon as they're created, whether or not the author does anything about it), and copyright is what gives the GPL "teeth". Without copyright, you would generally be able to duplicate and distribute programs without any kind of license or permission from the author. ...


19

GPL does not purport that there is no copyright in a work to which the license applies: the works are still in copyright. It relies on the notion of copyright (which it redefines to include "similar things") on order to identify what rights are granted (you have the right to do things that would be copyright infringement, if you did those acts without ...


11

This might be better on English.SE since it is really just about the meaning of English words, and there are several related questions on that site. I think therefore is a spelling error and they meant to write therefor. Therefor means "for that", just as thereof means "of that". If so, then sentence could be rephrased: If the Grantor ...


10

Issue in this sense means a person's children or other lineal descendants such as grandchildren and great-grandchildren. It does not mean all heirs, but only the direct bloodline.


7

In a deposition, attorneys are supposed to keep their objections short and refrain from making an objection that indicates to the witness how he should answer. A question might be objectionable because it lacks foundation, because it is compound, because it calls for speculation, etc. Example 2, for instance, could be said to assume that Ms. Redacted was ...


6

In this context, the phrase "there are no equitable considerations that would require the court to reduce or deny reimbursement for the parents" largely refers to defenses to claims arising under the law of equity as applied historically in the chancery courts of England, and more recently, to claims of a type that would have been brought in equity courts if ...


5

The dichotomy between solicitors and barristers in the UK isn't one based on verbal definitions in the English language. In other words, the fact that barristers argue and solicitors don't isn't something that's inherent to the words, it's just how British law decided to divide it. Since those countries with solicitor generals don't have this dichotomy, they ...


5

It’s an metaphor, not a legal term Blacksmiths hammer things out on an anvil and the phrase “hammer it out” means to work it through (whatever ‘it’ is) like a blacksmith works steel. What Lord Nicholls is saying is that he is unwilling to articulate a general principle of law regarding divestment of profits in the abstract and that each actual (concrete) ...


4

Generally an affirmative defense raises some ground other than an element of the offense or civil claim, such as justification (e.g. self-defense), privilege (I'm a soldier acting under lawful orders so I'm immune from liability), the invalidity of a law, statute of limitations, insanity, a pardon, bankruptcy, a settlement agreement, or payment of the amount ...


4

What we commonly refer to as the Common Law system, which originates from England and is the system used in most former English colonies including the USA, is actually two distinct strands of law: law and equity. Before 1873, England had two parallel court systems: courts of "law" which could only award money damages and recognized only the legal owner of ...


4

One possible reading of this clause is: The tenant is required to pay for the preparation of a forfeiture notice, even if ("notwithstanding that") the forfeiture doesn't actually happen ("forfeiture is avoided")--but the tenant doesn't have to pay for the notice if the forfeiture doesn't happen for the following reason ("avoided otherwise than by"): because ...


3

In this context, the meaning of "the necessity therefore" and "the necessity thereof" would be identical. Both constructions are less than ideal forms of legal drafting and a bit archaic.


3

You are in court defending yourself because someone claims you did X and you should be punished for it or pay damages. A defense is you saying “I didn’t do X”. An affirmative defence is either you saying “Even if I did X, I was allowed to do it”, or “Even if I did X and even if I wasn’t allowed to do it, I shouldn’t be punished for it”.


3

I belive that in British English, and other versions of English derived from BrE, "to have taken advice" usually means to have obtained a formal professional opinion, often from a lawyer, but it could be from an accountant, an architect, or any other sort of professional. To use such a phrase in a business letter might well imply having obtained a ...


2

if someone claims to have "taken advice", and the advice they received was from a non-lawyer, is the claim misleading? No. The language "taken advice" does not imply "taken legal advice", let alone one arising from an attorney-client relation or taken from someone purporting to be a lawyer. The language "taken advice" ...


2

An advance payment is given in expectation that it will be earned. In the future when the work has been done the payment is now an "earned advance payment" It seems that the case is about someone who took an advance and then took no steps towards earning it and presumably did not return it, hence it is "unearned". There is no tautology here as an advance ...


2

A holding is effectively the outcome of a hearing, based on the relevant laws of the jurisdiction and the facts of the case. The use of held: here indicates what that holding was.


2

I'm not familiar with this law, but if it works like other tax confidentiality laws I'm familiar with, it would be interpreted so broadly that there would effectively be no difference between "facts," "particulars" or "information." People receiving tax returns under this law would be prohibited from disclosing any of them. Anything that is in the return ...


2

This basically means that you have to sign off on paperwork for your employer to be called the owner of a patent or copyright or trade secret, and to cooperate in testifying in court if someone disputes their ownership or the validity of a patent or copyright or trade secret. It also means that they can sign on your behalf for you when there is intellectual ...


2

The court is ordering the appellant to pay the respondent for any court costs it has paid. The losing party in a lawsuit is frequently ordered to reimburse the prevailing party for whatever it costs it may have incurred. Those costs typically come in the form of fees for various actions taken by the clerk, from the filing of the complaint to sending ...


1

In a legal senses, A "life sentence" has a statutory meaning (usually 25 years as a punishment, though other jurisdictions may have different rules, typically common law legal systems have Life = 25 years). Where as a natural life may exceed 25 years to a degree of time, a criminal sentanced to a life sentance when he is 25 years of age would be out at 50 ...


1

Supplementing @DaleM's correct and excellent answer, here is a picture of metal being hammered on an anvil.


1

The "perfecting" language refers to essentially signing over or doing what is necessary (perhaps, for example, providing supplementing documentation or an affidavit or testimony) to ensure it has the rights to the things it enumerates in the text. You may have heard of perfecting title with respect to property purchases. Similar concept of removing the "...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible