| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
The GPL's true strengthThe GPL's true strengthPosted Aug 23, 2004 6:32 UTC (Mon) by mbp (guest, #2737)In reply to: The GPL's true strength by vdvo Parent article: IBM files another summary judgment motion
It demonstrates IBM are confident in the "got them both ways" design of the GPL: either SCO accepted it, or they did not (and are violating IBM's copyright).
Some prominent SCO/Microsoft shills have argued that the GPL is invalid in the sense that it allows redistribution but the conditions cannot be enforced. No, it doesn't make sense to me either, but people do argue this.
Alternatively, SCO have argued that they "didn't know" they were agreeing to the GPL, but that they were allowed to redistribute IBM's work anyhow. Larry Rosen argues something like this when he says free software ought to have an explicit clickthrough assent. IANAL, but I think he's wrong.
(Log in to post comments)
|
|
||||||||||||