Advertisement Advanced thin client solution for Linux, based on Open Source. Mix Windows and Linux applications on the same desktop. V
|
The text of IBM's counterclaimsThe text of IBM's counterclaimsPosted Aug 8, 2003 22:11 UTC (Fri) by dmantione (guest, #4640)In reply to: The text of IBM's counterclaims by vonbrand Parent article: The text of IBM's counterclaims
Exactly, it's perfectly legal to license some open source software to someone, and then
(Log in to post comments)
The text of IBM's counterclaims Posted Aug 8, 2003 23:33 UTC (Fri) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
Not quite right. It's permitted to links non-GPL code to GPL code, as long as none of the provisions of the GPL are violated. (Thus, you can link no-advertising-clause BSD-licensed code to GPLed code freely.) The problem with SCO's situation is that their non-GPL code has more restrictions than the GPL. That is not allowed, under clause 6 of the GPL.
The text of IBM's counterclaims Posted Aug 11, 2003 17:14 UTC (Mon) by leandro (guest, #1460) [Link] > the user cannot legally combine both pieces. This would mean the end user cannot legally use Linux Anyone can use any GPL code. The restrictions are on redistributing it.
The text of IBM's counterclaims Posted Aug 11, 2003 17:48 UTC (Mon) by playfair (guest, #13918) [Link] Seems, from reading the GPL, that anyone who buys a SCO license breaches the GPL and must stop using Linux and probably all other GPL software.Buying a license becomes an agreement under the terms of the section 7 quoted above. So anyone who pays SCO for a license gets screwed by SCO and screws themselves, too.
|
Copyright © 2008, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds
Powered by Rackspace Managed Hosting.