Chris Lattner wrote: > To be perfectly clear, I'm not suggesting that the FSF or GCC > project change their policies.
Sure. But others have and that's what this thread is all about. Jonathan Corbet wrote: > If the copyright holders don't wish to sue, then, one presumes, they > are not unhappy about the use of their code? No, certainly not. One presumes, instead, that they feel it's too much TROUBLE to sue, which is exactly the point here. If I'm walking down the street and somebody's careless and knocks me down and I'm in pain for a couple of days because of injuring my ankle and I choose not to sue the person, does that mean I'm not unhappy he injured me? If I own 1% of the code of a program and somebody makes it non-free, I'm going to be upset, but probably not enough to either sue the person or try to organize a group do to collectively. But if instead I assigned that software to a group that decided to sue, I'd be very happy they did and glad that my assignment let them be able to do it. Olivier Galibert wrote: > You can't force some entity to release source code they have > copyright to, that's not part of the legal remedies that are > available to a judge. What makes you say that? Why couldn't that be a legal remedy? When you lose a suit, the whole point is you lose something of value. Maybe it's money, maybe it's real property, maybe it's a vehicle, maybe it's custody of a child, or maybe it's loss of rights to illectual property. The remedy you say a judge "can't" do is, in fact, not that uncommon.
