"David Kastrup" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
The recipient of GPLed software is free to declare the GPL void and
revert to default copyright rules.
What is at issue today, though, is the nature of such "default copyright
rules". If there is no fee charged to use the work or to redistribute the
work, the copyright can be ignored unless the author can show some degree of
harm to himself.
That makes it rather hard to have the GPL reviewed on its merits: it
requires the defendant stating (and persisting on the statement rather
than settling and coming into compliance) that he is in compliance with
the GPL. Only in that case will the GPL adherence get a judicial review
(otherwise, just plain copyright law is involved). All cases so far in
U.S. jurisdiction have been cut&dry to a degree where no defendant was
stupid enough to even try that course.
Verizon said bushwah to the GPL and got the plaintiff to agree.
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
