@@ -1964,16 +1964,16 @@ confusion about GPLv2\@. Because of the prevalence of proprietary software,
most users, programmers, and lawyers alike tend to be more familiar with
EULAs. EULAs are believed by their authors to be contracts, requiring
formal agreement between the licensee and the software distributor to be
valid. This has led to mechanisms like ``shrink-wrap'' and ``click-wrap''
as mechanisms to perform acceptance ceremonies with EULAs.
The GPL does not need contract law to ``transfer rights.'' No rights
are transfered between parties. By contrast, the GPL is a permission
The GPL does not need contract law to ``transfer rights.'' Usually, no rights
are transfered between parties. By contrast, the GPL is primarily a permission
slip to undertake activities that would otherwise have been prohibited
by copyright law. As such, it needs no acceptance ceremony; the
by copyright law. As such, GPL needs no acceptance ceremony; the
licensee is not even required to accept the license.
However, without the GPL, the activities of copying, modifying and
distributing the software would have otherwise been prohibited. So, the
GPL says that you only accepted the license by undertaking activities that
you would have otherwise been prohibited without your license under GPL\@.