| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
It's never just ignoranceIt's never just ignorancePosted Jul 25, 2004 14:43 UTC (Sun) by fjf33 (subscriber, #5768)In reply to: It's never just ignorance by tialaramex Parent article: OLS: Enforcing the GPL Not from what I read. It seems his policy (as opposed to FSF's) is to get the lawyers out fast and get to trial fast so that companies don't drag their feet. Essentially he assumes there is an intent to steal from the corporations to begin with. Not a mistake or missinformation as the previous poster does. Is the FSF disingenous? Maybe, maybe not.
(Log in to post comments)
It's never just ignorance Posted Jul 26, 2004 13:19 UTC (Mon) by pflugstad (subscriber, #224) [Link] At this point, any company that uses GPL'd software knows what the license means. If they don't, they deserve to get sued, and fast. I'd be completely surprised if there are any cases of a company using GPL'd software and not complying with the license through ignorance. Which means that companies are making the concious decision to NOT comply with the GPL - so they get sued - so what, they'll drag it out in court until it doesn't matter any more. If you don't think this is a concious business decision on their part, you are completely naive. Companies do this as a matter of course, regardless of the nature of the license on the software they are using (commercial or otherwise). The intent to steal is definately there, as is the intent to delay getting taken to court as long as possible.
|
|
||||||||||||