Garrett: The ongoing fight against GPL enforcement

Posted Feb 1, 2012 0:08 UTC (Wed) by josh (subscriber, #17465)
In reply to: Garrett: The ongoing fight against GPL enforcement by landley
Parent article: Garrett: The ongoing fight against GPL enforcement

A company doesn't have to settle and deal with the settlement terms the SFC imposes (compliance officer and all). They could instead choose to go to court, and deal with the legal penalties of copyright infringement. Oddly, nobody ever seems to do that. Presumably, they consider the settlement less onerous to deal with.

to post comments

Garrett: The ongoing fight against GPL enforcement

Posted Feb 1, 2012 1:16 UTC (Wed) by landley (guest, #6789) [Link] (1 responses)

SCO never had a leg to stand on. They were a tiny little nobody that picked a fight with one of the most competent legal teams on the planet based on smoke and mirrors and bluster and bluffing.

The case dragged on for _seven_years_.

Garrett: The ongoing fight against GPL enforcement

Posted Feb 1, 2012 2:20 UTC (Wed) by josh (subscriber, #17465) [Link]

Like I said, presumably the companies violating the GPL considered a settlement less onerous to deal with. Precisely what makes it so effective to require compliance with other GPL licenses at the same time.

Also, SCO had a vested interest in dragging the lawsuits out as long as possible, because they had no hope of winning but they could keep FUDding and extorting as long as the lawsuit continued. By contrast, those enforcing the GPL just want companies to come into compliance, and they don't seem to have any problem with that occurring quickly and quietly. Also, unlike SCO, the companies enforcing the GPL actually have a case, and a fairly open-and-shut one at that.