David Kastrup wrote: > Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> "D.C. Parris" wrote: >> [...] >>> what is the effect of the auto-termination clause? >> >> Here's what a IALNAP (I am lawyer, not a programmer) said. >> >> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/05/msg00350.html >> >> Basically, just like the rest of the GPL drivel authored by a >> programmer-not-a-lawyer RMS, it has no legal effect whatsoever. >> >> Hope this helps. >
While I strongly disagree with your opinion of the GPL, I do appreciate the link. It is helpful to understand the role of the auto-termination clause (assuming the view expressed is accurate). I don't care to get into a flame war over the legitimacy of the GPL. It must have at least some legitimacy, since its terms have been upheld in more than one case. > In case this is not very obvious already, following Mr Terekhov's > advice with regard to the GPL does not involve erring on the safe > side, to put it mildly. > I do believe Lycoris, although the company no longer exists, did violate the GPL and lost the right to redistribute the software in question (potentially somewhere in the neighborhood of several hundred packages). I still question whether Mandriva has inadvertently stepped on their own toes by their acquisition of the Lycoris assets. My understanding is that they have inherited Lycoris' legal problems. If true, how might that play out? Since Mandriva has been distributing source code all along, for many of the same packages distributed by Lycoris, are they thus in the clear, at least with respect to those packages? Don -- DC Parris The Freely Project (USA) www.thefreelyproject.org www.thefreelyproject.us _______________________________________________ Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list Gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
