[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: SCO laying an ambush for the GPL?
From: |
John Phillips |
Subject: |
Re: SCO laying an ambush for the GPL? |
Date: |
19 Jul 2004 20:27:47 GMT |
User-agent: |
slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) |
In article <Pine.LNX.4.44.0407192020230.1726-100000@yeoshua.ukpost.com>,
Jason Clifford wrote:
> If the GPL is declared unlawful or unenforcable the only person(s) having
> any right to the software is the author(s) and anyone who chooses to
> accept the terms as a contract.
Let me quibble. If the doctrine of copyright misuse is the reason the
GPL is declared unenforceable [1] then AIUI the copyright owners lose
their ability to enforce their rights (never mind the financial problems
of doing so anyway). In effect this grants rights to others.
However I believe it remains true that no-one else can claim those
copyrights and enforce them over the copyright owners or others.
[1] I still think this is not likely.
--
John Phillips
- Re: SCO laying an ambush for the GPL?, (continued)
- Re: SCO laying an ambush for the GPL?, John Phillips, 2004/07/19
- Re: SCO laying an ambush for the GPL?, Stefaan A Eeckels, 2004/07/20
- Re: SCO laying an ambush for the GPL?, Alexander Terekhov, 2004/07/20
- Re: SCO laying an ambush for the GPL?, Alexander Terekhov, 2004/07/20
- Re: SCO laying an ambush for the GPL?, David Kastrup, 2004/07/20
- Re: SCO laying an ambush for the GPL?, Alexander Terekhov, 2004/07/20
- Re: SCO laying an ambush for the GPL?, Greg Hennessy, 2004/07/20
- Re: SCO laying an ambush for the GPL?, Alexander Terekhov, 2004/07/20
- Re: SCO laying an ambush for the GPL?, Greg Hennessy, 2004/07/20