Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Linux GPL and binary module exception clause? | From | Brian Beattie <> | Date | Fri, 12 Dec 2003 15:26:15 -0500 |
| |
On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 07:58, David Woodhouse wrote:
> My point, however, was that a copyright licence _can_ make such > requirements. It _can_ require you to bathe daily in creosote too, and > if you don't like that you have the option of not using the software > which is licensed that way.
I'd be willing to bet, that since bathing in creosote is extremely unhealthy, the courts might well find that that restriction was nonsense. This being the case they might decide that taken as a whole the license was a fraud and grant the public the right to unrestricted use of the product in question. Especially if the defendants lawyer was particularly good. -- Brian Beattie | Experienced kernel hacker/embedded systems beattie@beattie-home.net | programmer, direct or contract, short or www.beattie-home.net | long term, available immediately.
"Honor isn't about making the right choices. It's about dealing with the consequences." -- Midori Koto
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |