[Samba] [OT] Fyodor terminates SCO nmap rights -- how about Samba?
spam at tnonline.net
Fri Feb 27 23:28:59 GMT 2004
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 17:43:51 -0500
> Rashkae <rashkae at tigershaunt.com> wrote:
>> As much as I would like to see a slew of copyright infringement claims
>> get filed against SCO, from my reading of the GPL, violations of the
>> license only terminates your right to distribute the software which
>> was violated. AFAIK, the only GPL software who's license SCO has
>> arguably violated, to date, is Linux. Making derogatory comments
> My question is this: by declaring the GPL as invalid, isn't that
> non-acceptance of the license, which in turn invalidates your right to
> distribute all GPL software? (SCO does distribute Samba in its products, while
> at the same time they have a document on their website declaring the GPL invalid;
> See: http://www.thescogroup.com/copyright/ for details)
> I believe acceptance of the license is required to distribute GPL products,
> although IANAL.
> Michael Brown
I am not sure it is. I think they mean that because the GPL is
invalid then it has no legal binding what so ever. That is why (in
their minds) they
can continue to use GPL code.
However if that is the case, then the code would be protected under
normal copyright laws.
I think that SCO sees this problem and will probably claim that the
"intent" of the people releasing code under GPL is that the code
would be "public domain" and thus free to use even for SCO.
Or they simply ignore the copyright law as each copyright holder
must them selfs proceed legally (and make proof that they are indeed
the copyright holder) for SCO to stop using their code.
Of course I am just rambling as I know very little of US laws.
More information about the samba