On 8/20/99, Rich Stim <rwstim[_at_]aol.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Joseph Riolo <riolo[_at_]voicenet.com> wrote:
> >
> > The answer to your question is no. (Oral permission is not valid in
> > any court -- you need a written permission.)
>
> I don't believe that is correct advice. Although I advise against
> relying on oral permissions, generally, an oral permission may be
> legally enforceable if it qualifies as a contract under general
> state contract law principles. That is the parties are capable,
> the purposes is legal and there is offer, acceptance and
> consideration. Moreover, even if you have no explicit oral
> agreement you still may have a right to use a work, under some
> conditions, if permission can be inferred from the conduct of the
> parties.
Like in any contract, express and implied licenses require consideration. However, what this means practically in the copyright context is interesting. For example, if I ask Author if I can copy his book and he says yes, even though I have offered him nothing in return, I can still lawfully copy his book. Absent consideration, though, he can revoke the license. On the other hand, if I have supplied consideration for the license, then whether Author may revoke the license would depend on the its terms.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:36 GMT