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

[Richard Poynder]

At 14:51 22/03/2002 +0000, kevin lyda wrote:

>On Fri, Mar 22, 2002 at 02:01:20PM +0000, Richard Poynder wrote:
> > Thanks for the note. Is not the important distinction between disputes 
> over
>
>thanks for the prompt reply.


No problem.


> > 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
>
>well, there are other legal remedies.  in the mysql case one party (i'm
>not certain of the players) was blocked from distributing their product.

Not so. You are confusing the GPL dispute with NuSphere with the trademark 
dispute with them.


>regardless it is rare.
>
>your article reprinted in the irish times discussed the financial risks
>and exposure from using software licensed under the gpl.  you did present
>a number of opinions, which i appreciate, but you didn't present the
>context which i think is unfortunate.


Sadly, it is hard to deal with a complex issue in so few words: one of the 
main drawbacks of journalism I'm afraid. Add to that that the article was 
also reduced in length internally by the FT editors (I work as a 
freelancer) -- but you will appreciate that there is a huge pressure on 
space in a national newspaper, and so this often has to happen.

>the net and the ease at which creative works can be copied and distributed
>is a concern to a wide range of people.  those groups have come up with a
>variety of solutions.  the riaa and mpaa have brought a host of lawsuits,
>lobied for the dmca, and are now trying to force computer manufaturers
>to enforce their licenses.  closed source software companies have also
>lobbied and influenced legislation like the dmca, ucita and software
>patent law in europe.  in addition they formed the bsa which tries to
>enforce their licenses.  this forces many companies to dedicate staff
>members to license audits in order to comply with bsa audits - facing
>"fines" if they fail to comply.
>
>and while most of the laws i mention are confined to the united states,
>similar laws (or in the case of the dmca, international treaties) have
>been enacted or are in the pipeline to be legislated around the world.
>
>those actions have real financial impact to companies across the globe
>- even companies whose primary business is not related to computers or
>the internet.
>
>that's the context the gpl lives in.  i do think companies should
>understand the gpl if they are using software under its license.  for some
>companies it might remove the possibility of using it.  however they
>should also understand what the alternatives offer.  it's my experience
>that companies are *not* well educated on *any* software licenses and
>that they routinely violate those licenses.  a company's financial risk
>is not reduced by installing a single copy of visual c++ across a few
>dozen developer workstations in lieu of gcc.


That sounds like the same conclusion that the article arrived at, so 
hopefully we are not too far apart on this.

I appreciate what you say about the DMCA and EU Copyright Directive. These 
are serious issues, and I have no doubt that the debate over intellectual 
property will only intensify in the coming years. It is also quite likely 
that legislation like the DMCA be reviewed, and in fact there are moves to 
do just that in the US right now. We shall see if they are successful.


>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

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