On Thu, 28 Jul 2005, Michael K. Edwards wrote: > > But that doesn't apply in the case of automatic systems for users to do the > > link. The GPL allows users to do what they want privately, so the users > > aren't performing infringing acts themselves. > While Andrew's parallel to Grokster is IMHO inapposite, he is correct > that a theory of contributory infringement (also available in other > countries under the name "vicarious liability") allows recovery from a > party whose role is to facilitate and encourage infringement by > others. The availability of some sort of personal-use "safe harbor" > (as in European patent law, for instance; see thread on XMMS and MP3) > does not necessarily protect a commercial entity whose product or > service does not have (or is not actually marketed for the sake of) > substantial non-infringing uses.
While that's true, the right of users to link the software in private isn't a personal-use safe harbor--it's explicitly allowed by the GPL. If the GPL lets the user do it, it isn't infringement at all. You can't have contributory infringement if there's no infringement. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
