Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- From: "stork" <tbandrow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 16 Mar 2006 12:37:57 -0800
Stork replied to:
I notice that you don't provide any sort of citation or reference to
those cases. I've looked into every German case involving the GPL that I
could find and not one of them dealt with *this* issue
Boy, that's a whopper.
From CNET: http://news.com.com/2100-7344-5198117.html
<i>The decision lends weight to the license, said John Ferrell of law
firm Carr & Ferrell. "This preliminary German decision reinforces the
essential obligations of the GPL by requiring that if you adopt and
distribute GPL code, you must include the GPL license terms and provide
source code to users," he said</i>
But you could take it from the horse's mouth and see the German
decision:
http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/resources/feedback/OIIFB_GPL2_20040903.pdf
I quote the Judge:
"The Court at first shares the opinion that one cannot regard the GPL
as containing a waiver of copyright and similar rights"
So much for your "poem dropped out of an airplane" argument.
"The Court at first has no doubt at all that the general conditions
have effectively been included in a possible contractual relationship"
So much for your "GPL is not a license" argument.
"The Court has no doubts about the admissibility of the conditions
embodied in Sects 2; 3 GPL"
In other words, the basic principal of, "if you use the GPL, you must
redistribute the source in our stuff too", is upheld.
That's not a complete ruling in favor of the GPL, in fact, in Germany
it may be illegal to not have a warranty in a license as is done in the
United States. But, given that a sitting US Supreme Court Justice,
Stevens and Scalia, both have already argued in favor, under varying
circumstances, about using court rulings in other countries as an aid
to making rulings in the United States, a German interpretation in
favor of the GPL might well swing the balance towards it in the USA,
especially if the court considers my style of argument with respect to
paramount author's rights.
More stuff: this link discusses the FSF position with which you
disagree:
http://www.crmbuyer.com/story/46121.html
"I agree with the FSF that the technical mechanism of combining two
pieces of program code (dynamic/static linking are just two
possibilities) is not important"
And this stuff discusses the GPL under other countries:
http://www.oslawblog.com/2005/01/gpl-and-non-us-law.html
Another German GPL case
http://www.wilmerhale.com/de/veroeffentlichungen/whPubsDetail.aspx?publication=346
A paper from a British law school that notes that "The preliminary
legal analysis of FOSS licenses conducted in the literature seems to
suggest that the model is legally valid".
http://www.law.ed.ac.uk/ahrb/script-ed/vol2-2/challenges.pdf
Ergot, your interpretation of linking is refuted.
And, the US Library of Congress argues that, well, BOTH of our
positions are probable interpretations of the GPL and the Law at this
point:
http://www.consumidoreslibres.org/cafta/RL32268.pdf
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- From: Jordan Abel
- Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- References:
- Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- From: stork
- Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- From: Jordan Abel
- Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- From: tbandrow
- Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- From: David Schwartz
- Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- From: tbandrow
- Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- From: David Schwartz
- Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- From: stork
- Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- From: David Schwartz
- Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- From: stork
- Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- From: Jordan Abel
- Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- From: tbandrow
- Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- From: Jordan Abel
- Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- From: stork
- Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- From: Jordan Abel
- Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- From: Peter Köhlmann
- Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- From: Jordan Abel
- Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- From: Peter Köhlmann
- Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- From: David Schwartz
- Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- Prev by Date: Re: smbmount returning 256 when called by system()
- Next by Date: Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- Previous by thread: Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- Next by thread: Re: Is stork a troll? (was Re: Trolltech QT license question)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|