-Clearly it would depend entirely on the context, but it seems that
in a whole range of plausible circumstances that a contract exists.

example: I stand on the street corner selling my own software in exchange
for
money, and part of the states sales agreement is that you cannot violate GPL
terms of my software.

In this scenario there is clearly a contract, and use of force seems no less
legitimate than in other contract violation cases.


On 31 December 2013 19:35, Mike Gogulski <mike@???> wrote:

>
> On 12/14/2013 11:49 AM, Bedeho Mender wrote:
> > To my knowledge, anarchism does not require abandoning use of violence
> > under all circumstances.
> >
>
> Surely not. Anarchism != pacifism, though some combine the two or choose
> to derive one from the other. I don't.
>
> > If one interprets the GPL violator as breaching contract with the creator
> > of the software, then use of violence to prohibit continued breach seems
> > like an act many anarchists would find acceptable.
>
> The "violator" has no contract with the creator under any reasonable
> interpretation.
>
> http://www.nostate.com/2323/intellectual-property-does-not-exist/
>
> and see particularly:
>
> http://www.nostate.com/514/and-you-agree/
>
> Peace,
> Mike
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>
>