(OT) - Major Blow to Copyleft Theory

[Chris Travers]

Michael Poole wrote:
> Arnoud Engelfriet writes:
>
>   
>
> The significance of whether the GPL is a contract is tied to common
> (or at least US) law consequences of contract violation: in the US, a
> court will usually remedy a contract violation through monetary
> damages rather than ordering specific performance -- unless real
> property is involved.  To meet its goal of increasing free software,
> the FSF would obviously prefer to impose specific performance on GPL
> violators.
>   
Honestly I dont see a problem here (IANAL) at least as regards the GPL. 
(Other licenses may vary.)

You violate my copyrights in your commercial product, you owe me 
potentially serious monetary damages to the point where it is not worth 
it.  You continue to do so.  The GPL has now been terminated so this is 
basic copyright infringement and I get an injunction.

What is wrong with awarding monetary damages *first* and them providing 
an option of an injunction if the behavior continues?

Best Wishes,
Chris Travers
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: chris.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 171 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20070827/a9a47352/attachment.vcf>