Is the contract restricted to the buyers, or to the "any 3rd party" of the GPL?

Posted Jan 9, 2026 0:06 UTC (Fri) by milesrout (subscriber, #126894)
In reply to: Is the contract restricted to the buyers, or to the "any 3rd party" of the GPL? by paulj
Parent article: SFC v. VIZIO: who can enforce the GPL?

My reading of this article (but without knowing anything about US law, and without having read any of the pleadings) is that it's a claim for third-party rights under the contract between the copyright holder and Vizio, not a claim that there is a contract between Vizio and the SFC.

Traditionally, contracts are purely private affairs and a non-party does not have the right to make a claim under the contract just because they're identified in it as a beneficiary. So if I had a contract with you where I gave you $1,000,000 and you gave me a house and also agreed to give my child a house, the orthodox position is that I can sue you for your failure to comply but by child cannot. But in many (most?) places this rule has been partially or wholly abrogated if the intention to benefit a non-party is made clear in the contract. But it really depends on the wording of the statute. In New Zealand, it has to be "a person, designated by name, description, or reference to a class, who is not a party to the deed or contract."

(This is not legal advice etc.)