Why the GPL is invalid.
russell at flora.ca
Thu Feb 12 23:51:07 UTC 2004
...etc...more repeats of old arguments already corrected.
I find this thread interesting in that it shows that it is not just the
lawyers for SCO that have problems understanding copyright law. While
this is not to excuse all the confusions here, I do suspect that it lends
some credibility to the theory that SCO may have started their case in an
honest belief that it had merit. All the assumptions that this is a
pump-and-dump and that it was another ENRON style business model may not
be entirely true.
Now, if people were to be taking some of those extremely long EULA's
from certain "software manufacturing" firms and putting them through the
burners, that could turn up some interesting things. I do believe that
there are many clauses in most EULA's that would be stricken if taken to a
court. Each EULA version likely has had far less legal analysis time
spent on it than various Open Source licenses are put through in this
forum alone. Discussion of any EULA would be off-topic for this forum,
but would be interesting to read elsewhere.
Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/>
Perspective of a digital copyright reformer on Sheila Copps, MP.
Discuss at: http://www.lulu.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2757
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
More information about the License-discuss