Re: JMRI case -- Implementation of the Federal Circuit's Opinion

[David Kastrup]

ZnU <znu@fake.invalid> writes:

> In article <85r63dpho3.fsf@lola.goethe.zz>, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> 
> wrote:
>> 
>> To have the GPL evaluated on "its merits", the defendant has to state
>> that he considers being in compliance with the GPL.  Up to now, none
>> of the defendants put forward that theory.  So there is no point for
>> the judge to go to the GPL in detail when the defendant does not
>> claim use of the license: its acceptance is quite voluntary.  If the
>> defendant did not accept it, the case is not about the GPL or its
>> merits.
>
> I'm not sure I understand this. If you reject the GPL, doesn't
> downloading a copy of a Linux distro (for instance) become copyright
> violation?

Sure.  There is a reason most of these cases settle once judge or legal
counsel has pointed this out to the defendant.

> The GPL is the only thing authorizing you to make that copy.

No, it is the only thing offering such authorization _a priori_ to any
interested party.  Most certainly other agreements or authorizations may
be put in effect.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum