User: Password:
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Toward healthy paranoia

Toward healthy paranoia

Posted Sep 14, 2013 12:49 UTC (Sat) by dd9jn (subscriber, #4459)
In reply to: Toward healthy paranoia by ScottMinster
Parent article: Toward healthy paranoia

Actually the GPLV3 makes the legal situation for companies safer. An (accidental) license violation won't anymore permanently terminate their right to distribute the work. Instead the self-healing clause from section 8 helps them to get back in compliance. Imaging one of the copyright older of a GPLv2 licensed work was hit by a bus and thus not anymore able to re-instate their rights to distribute the work after they have fixed the compliance problem. I feel much safer with the GPLv3 for that reason - those who plan to trick their users out obviously disagree.

(Log in to post comments)

Toward healthy paranoia

Posted Sep 15, 2013 11:05 UTC (Sun) by mpr22 (subscriber, #60784) [Link]

"Hit by a bus" is not a problem. Either they're still legally competent afterwards, in which case they can reinstate the license; they're dead, in which case their heirs are legally competent to reinstate the license; or they're alive but no longer legally competent, in which case whoever the law has authorized to act on their behalf is legally competent to reinstate the license.

More awkward is where they've divested themselves of their electronic devices and moved to, say, Mongolia or Nunavut.

Copyright © 2018, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds