From: Sancar Saran (saran@sim.com.tr)
Date: Thu 14 Aug 2003 - 18:44:20 EEST
SCO to argue General Public Licence invalid
The wacky wacky world of corporate lawyers
By INQUIRER staff: Thursday 14 August 2003, 08:56
SCO WILL attempt to win its $3 billion case against IBM by arguing that the
General Public Licence (GPL) is invalid.
That's what a pleader at legal practice Boies Schiller and Flexner is telling
the Wall Street Journal today.
The GPL licence allows software and work derived from it to be copied by
anyone at no charge.
But according to today's WSJ, quoting lawyer Mark Heise, the GPL is
pre-empted by US federal copyright law.
How does that work then? According to Heise, federal law only lets people
make a single backup copy of software, and that makes the GPL void under US
law.
Seems like a bloody flimsy argument to us, but in the topsy-turvy Alice in
Wonderland world of law, who knows what characters might suddenly turn into
wild cards?
In effect, Heise's argument seems to be that you have to have copyright on
software even if you insist that your software is not copyrighted. D'oh.
Of course GPL software is copyright and only public domain works, apparently,
lack copyright protection, maybe. The GPL specifically makes use of copyright
holders' authority to grant the right to copy authorisations.
Effectively, GPL does not remove the copyright of the original author, it
instead allows the work to be freely distributed as long as the distributions
and works derived from them are also made available under the licence.
If SCO's pleaders win this one, then surely it is guilty of massive copyright
infringement too? And if they do, then surely it must apply to BSD and Apache
style licences as well?
Has the whole world gone stark staring bonkers? [Yes. Ed.] µ
L'INQ
linux-sohbet listesinden cikmak ve tum listeci islemleri icin
http://liste.linux.org.tr/ adresini kullanabilirisniz.
Bu listeden cikmak icin <a href="mailto:linux-sohbet-request@liste.linux.org.tr?Subject=unsubscribe">tiklayiniz</a>