[ILUG] Re: court cases involving the gpl...

[Richard Poynder]

Hi Kevin,

Thanks for the note. Is not the important distinction between disputes over 
proprietary software licences and open source licences that in the case of 
open source software it is difficult to prove financial loss? If  a 
proprietary software company successfully proves infringement then it can 
ask the courts for damages for all the potential loss of sales/revenue 
occurring as a result of that infringement, plus any other associated 
damages. If, however, an open source software company has its licence 
violated it is more difficult to show financial loss, so legal action is 
less likely. After all, why go to the expense of a court action if there is 
little likelihood of financial gain, or of at least being able to 
financially punish the person who violated your licence, plus risk paying 
for lawyers and then not even succeed in your action? The MySQL case is 
different for that very reason -- it can claim financial loss on its 
paid-for product.

Regards,


Richard Poynder
Freelance Journalist
Phone: + 44 (0)191-386-0072
Mobile: 0793-202-4032
E-mail: rich_p at dial.pipex.com
Web: www.richardpoynder.com



At 13:42 22/03/2002 +0000, kevin lyda wrote:

>do you realise that the gpl has never gone to court?  there is currently
>one case that might make it to court between two companies that sell
>versions of mysql, but that's it.  every other instance of gpl violations
>has been settled, and usually quite amicably.
>
>now, compare this with numerous proprietary licenses.  the business
>software alliance (the bsa) has handed out millions of dollars in fines to
>businesses that don't correctly follow closed source licenses.  at&t sued
>the bsd crowd for including closed source code in their bsd licensed code.
>the company that did the initial drive compression s/w for ms ended up
>suing ms for taking their code (both sides were closed source code).
>
>there's one thread in common with free software developers (bsd, gpl
>and others), closed software developers, prose authors, and musicians:
>they all want the copyright that their creative work is released under
>to be respected.
>
>you chose to write an article hilighting *one* of those groups doing that.
>now, compare and contrast how gpl violations are handled, with how the
>bsa or the riaa is dealing with violations of their licenses.  how many
>fines have been demanded due to gpl violations, how many for the other?
>how many companies have been effectively put out of business due to
>violations of the gpl?  of closed software licenses?  of riaa enforcement?
>
>kevin
>
>--
>kevin at suberic.net          buffy: come on, can't you put your foot down?!
>fork()'ed on 37058400      giles: it *is* down.
>meatspace place: orbit     buffy: one of these days you're going to have to
>http://suberic.net/~kevin         get a grown up car.  --inca mummy girl