Rjack wrote:
"Terms of the license" are not honored when they are illegal or otherwise unenforcable under prevailing contract or copyright law. The GPL contains terms of this nature.
Good thing the GPL contains no terms of this nature.
Is the GPL meant for only one user? I thought it was a "general public" license.
The case demonstrates that when a license grants conditional privileges, it is then considered copyright infringement when the licensee violates those conditions. In this case, it was "one user". For the GPL, it's making source available. GPL opponents have been seen to argue incorrectly that violating the terms of the GPL is not copyright infringement.
I haven't the slighted idea why you cited to this case
When it comes time for a court to decide that a "work embodied the type of creativity that copyright laws exist to facilitate" it will come down firmly on the side of GPL copyright holders and against code grabbers. _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
