Question on OSD #5

[Chris Travers]

On Nov 27, 2007 12:49 AM, Tzeng, Nigel H. <Nigel.Tzeng at jhuapl.edu> wrote:

> Yes, but they may need to distribute a binary version only and limit
> access to source code because the end users have no "need to know".

The NSA would actually be in a funny place here.  First they cannot be
sued for financial damages in US court, so at best they risk being
told to stop distributing the software if they do something illegal.
This may make them better able to push interpretations of the license
which are different than those accepted by, say, the FSF.  In short
they can do more risky things than most businesses can because, unless
the Federal Government allows for financial damages, the only relief
one can get is injunctive.

Hence they could merely use GPL'd libraries and argue that the use of
those libraries does not constitute derivation.   Suppose you do
challenge them?  They might win (and the linking == derivation
argument falls for everyone), they might lose but have Congress come
to their rescue and rewrite the rules.  Or they might lose and simply
be told that this is a violation of the GPL and they need to stop
distributing it (and you are still out legal fees unless someone is
representing you pro bono).

Governments are a sort of special case.  They can also rewrite the
rules in the middle in order to protect their interests.  In short it
may not be useful to suggest what governments may or may not be able
to do under the GPL.


> > For an original author with many patents, the patent issue is more
> > important.  I would still prefer an implicit "use" license over a
> > deliberately weak explicit license.
>
> I suppose that we have to agree to disagree.  From my perspective
> I have zero desire to potentially give away someone else's work.

In general I would agree.  Patent retaliation clauses (let us use your
patents or else everyone can sue you for using this software) do give
permission to perhaps even maliciously infringe on patents.  If the IT
industry were not in such tough shape relating to patents, I think
everyone would see these clauses as unethical.  However the fact is
that the patent system stinks for the IT industry, and so we can argue
about what is worse until we actually get good patent reform.

Best Wishes,
Chris Travers