Hi Ralph > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected] > violations.org] On Behalf Of Ralph Corderoy > Sent: 13 April 2014 10:09 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: GPL violation by Renault (R-Link system) > > Hi Joseph, > > > I'm wondering if there is some parallel with counterfeit software/ > > movie dvds? > > > > Consider if I buy a copy of MS Office, and it turns out not to have a > > valid license code - there must be some recourse under the Sales of > > Goods Act. In the GPL cases we normally discuss, the main difference I > > see is that the GPL software only forms a component of the product > > rather than the entire product, but it is still unlicensed software. > > > > Potentially trading standards could also take an interest, but this > > would require finding a trading standards officer that understood the > > issue and wasn't busy dealing with easier to prosecute cases. > > http://www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/policy/leadofficerspecialistsubject.cfm > says the institute has lead officers, including one for Intellectual Property. > Their contact page tries to ward off the unwashed masses but it might be > possible to broach if they're aware of the issue. Steve Baker, MP, is a > former > programmer who still dabbles, e.g. > https://twitter.com/SteveBakerMP/status/440133081887170560. Perhaps he'd > be willing to offer advice as to how to get Government bodies understanding > the issue? > FYI, I've spoken to the division at HM Revenue and Customs which deals with the seizure of infringing items, and they see no reason in principle why they may not use their powers against items containing infringing GPL code. However, the applicant does have to give various undertakings as to costs and damages etc. if the allegation turns out to be incorrect (which means, potentially, that they may be forced to the expense of proving their case in a court of law), so this is a fairly major disincentive to use this process.
Best - Andrew
