FAQ - GPL Case Law? : GPL issue at my work place
Ernest Prabhakar
ernest.prabhakar at gmail.com
Fri Jan 18 18:06:55 UTC 2008
Hi all,
This is a topic that seems to come up periodically. Someone care to
take a stab at writing a FAQ?
Q: Is there any existing case law covering the GNU General Public
License?
-- Ernie P.
On Jan 18, 2008, at 5:20 AM, Tzeng, Nigel H. wrote:
>> From: Arnoud Engelfriet [mailto:arnoud at engelfriet.net]
>>
>> As far as I can tell this has not made European lawyers more (or
>> less) comfortable with open source licenses.
>
> I think James's point is that without actual court results as
> opposed to
> settlements the risks of using GPL is unbounded from the conservative
> point of view of some corporate lawyers.
>
> The worst case scenario is an injunction against distribution of all
> affected products unless all the corporate IP used in the software is
> released under GPL including all relevant software patents (under v3
> anyway). Business process patents presumably as well since they would
> be codified in the software.
>
> For the past cases, like BusyBox, it wasn't really THAT big a deal to
> conform since those companies were largely hardware makers. It was
> more
> costly to have the devices sit in legal limbo hence the settlements
> IMHO.
>
> But for other domains the potential impact to a company could be quite
> significant to have to conform to the GPL. FSF's position on what
> is a
> derivative work is not overly helpful in reducing concerns. Not that
> Sun would force a company to release their product IP because they
> used
> the GPL'd MySQL connector library without a commercial license but
> that
> they potentially COULD under the GPL has to be factored in.
>
> There is a reason I use PostgeSQL over MySQL beyond any technical
> ones.
>
> Certainly this conservatism can be seen in the current example even
> though from Google's example they are on pretty safe ground.
More information about the License-discuss
mailing list