[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: The GPL dream is finally over!

From: Linonut
Subject: Re: The GPL dream is finally over!
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 10:31:30 -0400
User-agent: slrn/ (Linux)

* Alexander Terekhov peremptorily fired off this memo:

> Linonut wrote:
>> The good faith usage of the GPL has been going on for a couple decades
>> now, and has resulted in a large body of software being available to
>> millions of people.  A conflict with business was inevitable, but, in
>> the highest-profile case so far, IBM vs SCO, the plaintiff kind of let
>> the GPL angle drop.
> Linonut, Linonut. If you believe that IBM is/was of opinion that "The
> GPL is a license and not a contract" how are you going to explain 
> IBM's SIXTH COUNTERCLAIM (Breach of the GNU General Public License) 
> against SCO... "SCO accepted the terms of the GPL... IBM is entitled 
> to a declaration that SCO's rights under the GPL terminated, an 
> injunction prohibiting SCO from its continuing and threatened breaches 
> of the GPL and an award of damages in an amount to be determined at 
> trial" (Pretty much the same as MySQL's claim below, BTW.) From IBM's 
> memorandum: 
> "SCO's GPL violations entitle IBM to at least nominal damages on the 
> Sixth Counterclaim for breach of the GPL. See Bair v. Axiom Design LLC 
> 20 P.3d 388, 392 (Utah 2001) (explaining that it is "well settled" 
> that nominal damages are recoverable upon breach of contract); Kronos, 
> Inc. v. AVX Corp., 612 N.E.2d 289, 292 (N.Y. 1993)  ("Nominal damages 
> are always available in breach of contract action".). " 
> What say you now, Linonut?

That you simply want to s/license/contract/ in the above.

In other words, more Terekhov hand-waving.

> MySQL's counter-complaint asserting breach of GPL license contract 
> ("COUNT VIII Breach of Contract (GPL License)") and asking for 
> declaratory (court to declare GPL terminated) and injunctive (court to 
> preliminary and permanently enjoin Progress/NuSphere from "copying, 
> modifying, sublicensing, or distributing the MySQL(TM) Program") 
> relief (plus damages, of course). 
> Note that Judge Saris correctly denied MySQL's motion for preliminary
> injunction applying contract (not copyright) standard regarding
> irreparable harm.
> What say you now, Linonut?

That the above supports viewing the GPL as a license, not a contract.

A mind is a wonderful thing to waste.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]