| |||||||||||
Not just IBM's problemNot just IBM's problemPosted Aug 1, 2003 3:31 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954)In reply to: Not just IBM's problem by DaveK Parent article: Not just IBM's problem Did SCO demand license fees from people who got Linux via SCO's distribution of Linux? If not, then there is no GPL violation. SCO can distribute Linux under GPL, including SCO-copyright code, while also demanding license fees for the same SCO-copyright code that a user got another way. In case this isn't clear, here's a simpler example: If I download a Linux kernel from kernel.org and place my own scheduler in it, I can then distribute the modified kernel to Joe under GPL, giving Joe the right to redistribute without owing me anything. And I can simultaneously sell Mary a copy of just my scheduler code with no right to redistribute it to anyone. If Pedro copies and uses Mary's copy, he owes me royalties too. But if Pedro copies my scheduler code from Joe, Pedro owes me nothing.
(Log in to post comments)
|
|||||||||||