| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
From the customer's perspectiveFrom the customer's perspectivePosted Dec 4, 2003 5:31 UTC (Thu) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330)In reply to: From the customer's perspective by error27 Parent article: The GPL Is a License, not a Contract
My guess is that it depends. If they promised you that the software was under the GPL, I would assume that this promise to you is enforceable (especially if you paid them cash; in that case there's a contract, but it isn't the GPL, it's the deal between you and them). If they didn't make such a promise, but it turns out that they are shipping GPLed code, then they are engaging in copyright infringement, so it would be up to the copyright holder to enforce the copyright, and they couldn't be forced to relicense the part of the work that they own. One thing I have no idea about is whether GPL violation can ever be a criminal rather than a civil matter, as other forms of copyright infringement can be.
(Log in to post comments)
From the customer's perspective Posted Dec 4, 2003 10:18 UTC (Thu) by MathFox (guest, #6104) [Link] One thing I have no idea about is whether GPL violation can ever be a criminal rather than a civil matter, as other forms of copyright infringement can be.Legally seen: copyright infringement is copyright infringement and you can be criminally prosecuted for GPL infringement. So far the theory. In practice I don't think that a prosecutor will go after a GPL violator because
|
|
||||||||||||