Legal traps in open source

Kim Holburn kim.holburn at anu.edu.au
Tue Oct 29 22:20:05 EST 2002


There's an interesting article "Legal traps in open source" in the Australian IT section today (Tuesday) p27.  

It calls the GPL "viral", where have I heard that before?

I don't follow her logic, why would "using" a piece of GPL software be in any way restrictive as opposed to "using" a piece of bought software (a binary) with a complicated and restrictive EULA?

This is interesting:
>The lack of a liability regime also meant the distributor was not liable for defects in the product, which may cause data loss or systems to crash.

Does this mean Microsoft are liable for defects in their products?


http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,5376561%5E15319%5E%5Enbv%5E15306,00.html


>Open source legal warning
>Jennifer Foreshew
>OCTOBER 29, 2002
>
>MANY developers and users of open source software were exposing themselves to legal threats and vulnerabilities yet to be tested under Australian law, an expert has warned.
>
>Minter Ellison technology group senior associate Debra Tippett said users must be properly informed of risks associated with open-source licences, such as the General Public Licence (GPL).
>
>"This is a big area to which nobody has given a lot of consideration, probably because open-source is still in its infancy here," Ms Tippett said.
>
>Open source software programs, such as Linux and Apache, have licences permitting unrestricted redistribution and modification, provided the user then grants the same rights over all copies and derivatives they create.
>
>"From a copyright point of view, developers are most at risk because they lose the ability to assert ownership. But from the customer's point of view, the warranties, indemnities, the IP ownership and all those sorts of things are important," she said.
>
>The lack of a liability regime also meant the distributor was not liable for defects in the product, which may cause data loss or systems to crash.
>
>The GPL had been around for about 10 years, but it had not been tested, Ms Tippett said.
>
>"Now some governments and large corporations are involved and they are wanting more security," she said.
>
>Legal uncertainties surrounding open-source software were complicated in Australia because of the Trade Practices Act and state Fair Trading legislation, Ms Tippett said.
>
>There was a push in the US to rewrite the GPL in a proper contractual form to make it more enforceable, she said.
>
>The critical issues involving the GPL - the licence used most commonly to distribute open-source software - include its viral nature, definition of a derivative work, copyright ownership and enforceability of its terms.
>
>"Open-source free licences are generally over the internet and assent to enter into the licence generally occurs when somebody modifies or distributes the actual program or any work based on that," Ms Tippett said.
>
>"This could be a problem with employees, who could, for example, be using a piece of open-source software that they download from somewhere.
>
>"Not understanding the implications of what they are doing, they could incorporate it into a program for their employer, which may then be distributed for a price and they could be in breach of the GPL."
>
>On the other hand, Ms Tippett said, open-source software saved on licensing, development times were shorter and bugs could be fixed more quickly.


Kim
-- 
--
Kim Holburn 
Network Consultant - Telecommunications Engineering
Research School of Information Sciences and Engineering
Australian National University - Ph: +61 2 61258620 M: +61 0417820641
Email: kim.holburn at anu.edu.au  - PGP Public Key on request

Life is complex - It has real and imaginary parts.
     Andrea Leistra (rec.arts.sf.written.Robert-jordan)



More information about the linux mailing list