decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Copy only if you agree to be held by the terms of the agreement | 367 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
GPL a contract or a license
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 20 2013 @ 12:29 PM EDT
Consider a hypothetical fishing license granted by a DNR, the license allows for
catching any number of bass but limits the number of trout caught to two.
Suppose now an irreverent angler is stopped with 5 bass and three trout in his
creel. Would those five bass have been caught legally under the license because
the angler was complying with that particular part of the license? Or would the
entire license have been revoked because the angler failed to comply with its
terms -- and thus ANY fish catching was done without a license?

Personally, I think it's the latter.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

GPL a contract or a license
Authored by: cjk fossman on Wednesday, March 20 2013 @ 12:35 PM EDT
Have you read the license?

Are you aware that the license has a provision requiring you
to provide source code?

Are you aware that the source code requirement has been held
up in court? Are you aware that violators, when confronted,
have folded like a facial tissue in a tsunami?

So it doesn't matter whether you call it a license, a
contract or a pork-pie hat, the GPL has teeth.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Copy only if you agree to be held by the terms of the agreement
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 20 2013 @ 01:18 PM EDT
The copy is first made and then (afterwards) distributed. It's either pirated copy or lawfully made copy irrespective of eventual distribution afterwards.
The copyright holder grants you the right to make a copy only if you agree to follow the GPL. Otherwise you are granted no right to copy and you are in violation of copyright law.

One of the terms of the GPL is that if, after making the copy, you distribute it then you will do certain things.

So what you do at the time of distribution does in fact affect whether your copying was legal or not.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

GPL a contract or a license
Authored by: PJ on Wednesday, March 20 2013 @ 01:39 PM EDT
This is your fantasy. But there are now too
many cases proving you wrong. So either
upgrade your brain or get out. Seriously.
This is too wrong to stay on Groklaw.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )