In article <[email protected]>, Hyman Rosen <[email protected]> wrote:
> amicus_curious wrote: > > It is sort of cutting their own throat, though. If something has no > > commercial value, being free as in beer, any case asking for monetary > > damages for violating its copyright could simply result in a summary > > judgement for zero compensation. > > The infringers would still be enjoined from creating further copies, > which would be fine from a GPL enforcement point of view. I think the > FSF might consider the loss of monetary damages for themselves to be > a fair trade. If the only penalty for a GPL violation is that you have to stop the violation, you are going to see a lot more violations. Put GPL code in your phone or router or set-top box, but don't credit it and don't release the source. Two or three years later, when you are caught, you start shipping source. You've had two or three years where you essentially got to use GPL code as if it were proprietary. Another use case (misuse case?) will be to launch your product with GPL code, while working on replacements for the GPL code. When you get caught violating the GPL a year or two later, you should be ready to switch over to your non-GPL code. -- --Tim Smith _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
