Re: Big blow to proprietary linking nonsense.

[amicus_curious]

"Hyman Rosen" <hyrosen@mail.com> wrote in message 
news:9viIn.8188$HG1.1274@newsfe21.iad...
> On 5/17/2010 5:14 PM, amicus_curious wrote:
> > I, as a downstream user of Rjack's modified program
>
> If a copy of the the program has been conveyed without
> complying with the requirements of the GPL, the conveyor
> has infringed the copyrights of the holders, and will be
> enjoined from further such conveyance and may be subject
> to other penalties if the infringement was deliberate.
Well, OK, so say that I post some link somewhere saying that you can get the 
Busy Box or whatever source from some place that has it.  Now you have said 
many times that covers the waterfront for using and conveying the GPL 
program.  So it is legitimately conveyed and subsequently it is legitimately 
modified by adding Rjack's proprietary piece to it to form the improved 
program.  You cannot sue the customer and I don't see where you can sue the 
distributor since he has published the link to the source meeting the GPL 
requirement


> The recipient of the illegally conveyed program has no
> right to further convey it, or to do anything else with
> it - holders of illegal copies of a work don't get any
> rights.

Well, in my scenario that is just what Rjack would want, since the user is 
not allowed to further convey Rjack's additions either.  It is pretty much 
like selling a program that uses some GPL program as a base but not putting 
the whole thing under the GPL.  Who cares what the user does with the 
original GPL program, there isn't any commercial value in that.  The key is 
being able to obtain the commercial value from the add-on that does 
something new.