| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
FSF, OSI and BusyboxFSF, OSI and BusyboxPosted Dec 20, 2008 14:18 UTC (Sat) by Tet (subscriber, #5433)In reply to: FSF, OSI and Busybox by landley Parent article: The FSF raises the stakes for Cisco The FSF is chosing to sue Cisco rather than Broadcom, not because Cisco is more in the wrong but because (as far as I can tell from the outside) they think Cisco is more easily intimidated It might not be pretty, but that's how the law works. When you have multiple infringing parties, it makes sense to sue the one you think has the highest likelihood of getting you a return. In this case, that happens to be Cisco rather than Broadcom. Whatever else though, Cisco do seem to be redistributing GPLed code without adhering to the terms of the license. Were you in Cisco's position, and about to release a product to the market, wouldn't you want to check that all of your licensing obligations had been met (whether you built the product yourself or bought it from Broadcom or someone in Taiwan is irrelevant here). Yet Cisco didn't do that. At best it's negligence, but repeating the same mistake again and again tends to imply it's something else. That alone makes them fair game in my book.
(Log in to post comments)
|
|
||||||||||||