On Oct 31, 4:42 am, Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> BusyBox Developers and Monsoon Multimedia Agree to Dismiss GPL Lawsuit
I'm curious - were here any preliminary rulings prior to the
settlement?
Often, a defendant will ask the judge for preliminary rulings on
points of law before deciding on a settlement approach. If the judge
says "yes, you broke the law", in the preliminary ruling, there is no
need to procede with the case, only to determine how to properly
comply.
In most cases, compliance is pretty simple. Make sure your
proprietary code calls LGPL shared libraries (or other GPL compatible
shared libraries, then have those shared libraries call the GPL code.
Conversely, you can have the GPL code call proprietary shared
libraries as "plug-ins".
Many of those who have published the noncritical portions of their
source code have been surprised at how helpful the Linux community can
be. Linksys published their source code and OSS contributors provided
new code for things like adding SAN storage to routers via a USB port
or hub.
The OSS solution to DRM is to publish the source with a license which
provides source code but forbids modifications of elements related to
legal compliance - such as DRM or patent related code. This was the
solution that made it possible to view DVDs on Linux.
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | The Software Freedom Law Center (SFLC) and Monsoon Multimedia today jointly
> | announced that an agreement has been reached to dismiss the GPL enforcement
> | lawsuit filed by SFLC on behalf of two principal developers of BusyBox.
> `----
>
> http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2007/oct/30/busybox-monsoon-settl...
>
> And Just Like That, The Games End - First Ever GPL Lawsuit Dismissed
> http://thinkingopen.wordpress.com/2007/10/30/and-just-like-that-the-g...
>
> Related:
>
> SFLC: Setting Legal Precedent Not the Goal of GPL Case
> http://www.itbusinessedge.com/blogs/osb/?p=241
>
> GPL defenders say: See you in court
> http://www.news.com/GPL-defenders-say-See-you-in-court/2100-7344_3-62...
>
> First U.S. GPL lawsuit heads for quick settlement
> http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS3761924232.html
>
> New Method To Detect and Prove GPL Violations
> http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/08/25/1648253&from=rss
>
> German Court convicted Skype of violating the GPL
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | German district court Munich has convicted Skype of violating the GPL. One of
> | the VoIP telephones sold by Skype run Linux, but the GPL text was not handed
> | out together with the phone, although the GPL requires that.
> `----
> http://liquidat.wordpress.com/2007/07/24/german-court-convicted-skype...
This may have also been significant. A well worded judgement in this
case would have had an impact on international copyright law. In this
case, the Judge would have been upholding the license provisions of
international copyright law. For the U.S. Judge to ignore this ruling
would have been "activist", judges legislating from the bench.
One can argue whether there should be restrictions on what can be
required in a copyright license, for example terms which require the
end-user to commit criminal acts, but under current US and
International Law, there are very few legal restrictions on what can
be required in a copyright license.
Altering this would mean the immediate collapse of Microsoft.
|
|
