Automatic GPL termination

[Alexander Terekhov]

On 9/13/07, Philippe Verdy <verdy_p at wanadoo.fr> wrote:

(Regarding CeCILL license upgrades and mutation to the GPL, including
future versions, if contaminated)

> The distributor acts as a proxy in the name of the original author.

Oh really? Ha! Are you rich, Philippe?

IBM to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit:
"Wallace's argument that "no charge" constitutes a "minimum" price for
purposes of antitrust analysis is untenable. A "minimum" price
agreement requires that any price below that price would violate the
agreement. In the unlikely event a licensor wished to license
modifications to software under the GPL at a price below zero (i.e.,
an effective negative price by paying the licensee to take the
license), such would in no way violate the GPL."

What if I'm gonna start licensing *in your name* (acting as your
proxy) at royalty rate of say minus one euro per act of copying,
Philippe? How soon are you going to become bankrupt? Just curious.

regards,
alexander.

--
"PJ points out that lawyers seem to have difficulty understanding the
GPL. My main concern with GPLv3 is that - unlike v2 - non-lawyers can't
understand it either."
                                      -- Anonymous Groklaw Visitor