Novell's IRC session on the Microsoft deal
Posted Nov 28, 2006 11:29 UTC (Tue) by AlexHudson
In reply to: Novell's IRC session on the Microsoft deal
Parent article: Novell's IRC session on the Microsoft deal
It's not that grey an area. If you don't infringe the license yourself, but basically set it up so that the end user running the software infringes it, you're still liable - it's contributory infringment.
For something to be CI, you generally have to prove 1) knowledge of the infringing activity and 2) that a material contribution was made [i.e., assistance].
Canonical must be aware that shipping the drivers built in is infringing, otherwise they would do it that way. They've also set it up so that users machine's automatically combine the material in an infringing way. Those two facts satisfy 1. and 2. above, to my mind.
to post comments)