http://yahoo.businessweek.com/technology/content/jun2003/tc2003063_1791_tc047.htmQuite a bit, actually. (Though how this will be handled will be a good test of copyleft licenses in general.)
How much safe harbor can an open source license like the OGL really provide?
The OGL, (unlike the GPL, AFAIK) mandates a period to cure. So, if a litigous company attemped what SCO is trying to do--rightly or wrongly--the rest of us would have a handy "60 days to fix it" once we learn of the problem.
But, really, if someone's determined to rock the boat, they're going to. We've all known this for years, if not longer. The OGL is in many ways just a safety net for when folk rock the boat--either we have a chance to fix the offense, or we have permission to use it. And that's assuming that we assume the SCO-alike's copyright claim is valid.
DM
PS: For the peanut gallery (y'know, those of you who subscribed recently or lurk and never read my posts) I'm neither a lawyer nor a seasoned industry veteran--just an opinionated gamer.
_______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
