[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!"
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!" |
Date: |
Fri, 05 Dec 2008 01:38:50 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) |
"amicus_curious" <ACDC@sti.net> writes:
> "David Kastrup" <dak@gnu.org> wrote:
>
>> The GPL is not a contract but a license. It spells the conditions
>> you have to meet.
>>
> I am not aware of any real distinction in the law based on the use of
> the two terms,
You can't state contractual penalties in a license short of withdrawal
of the license. In contrast, you can state penalties for non-compliance
in a contract. That is a very real distinction.
>>> In the case of the GPL, it is not so clear. If it is the same
>>> thing, as you say, the suit would be for the damage caused to the
>>> original author due to the violator not publishing the source code.
>>
>> Uh no. Damages are in addition to coming into compliance.
>>
> I would rather think that they were the direct consequence of not
> coming into compliance.
No, you are confusing penalties (which are a direct consequence, but not
applicable to licenses) with damages (which have to be assessed on a
case by case basis and just recompensate the damaged party for the
actually suffered and documented harm).
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
- Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!", (continued)
- Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!", Alexander Terekhov, 2008/12/09
- Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!", Hyman Rosen, 2008/12/09
- Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!", Alexander Terekhov, 2008/12/09
- Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!", Hyman Rosen, 2008/12/09
- Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!", Alexander Terekhov, 2008/12/09
- Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!", Hyman Rosen, 2008/12/09
- Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!", Alexander Terekhov, 2008/12/09
- Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!", Hyman Rosen, 2008/12/10
- Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!", amicus_curious, 2008/12/04
- Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!", Hyman Rosen, 2008/12/05
- Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!",
David Kastrup <=
- Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!", Rahul Dhesi, 2008/12/04
- Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!", JEDIDIAH, 2008/12/04
- Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!", Rjack, 2008/12/04
- Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!", David Kastrup, 2008/12/04
Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!", Rjack, 2008/12/02