Merijn de Weerd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 2006-03-24, Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> "Although a vertical, maximum-price-fixing agreement is unlawful under >> 1 of the Sherman Act, it does not cause a competitor antitrust injury >> unless it results in predatory pricing." -- U.S. Supreme Court > > You have yet to show that setting a price at zero is predatory > pricing. Just selling below cost is not by definition predatory.
A "scheme" can be so in this context. Too bad there is no scheme. The GPL just applies to software licensed by the copyright bearer. People choosing to contribute in this project don't do this because of a pricing scheme they fix behind the backs of their competitors. They do it by heeding the license. And all of their competitors are free to do the same, if they wanted to. If they don't want to, they are free to license their own stuff differently. It is not a "price fixing scheme" if independent Windows users all heed the EULA. So why would it be one if independent GPLed software users all heeded the GPL? -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
