In-Reply-To: <87ekj2fomv.fsf@sanosuke.troilus.org>
References: <MDEHLPKNGKAHNMBLJOLKAEKLPKAA.davids@webmaster.com> <1100042579.16729.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <AF8A1638-32B8-11D9-857E-000393ACC76E@mac.com> <87ekj2fomv.fsf@sanosuke.troilus.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Message-Id: <053C3394-32C5-11D9-857E-000393ACC76E@mac.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=3D=3Fiso-8859-1=3Fq=3F_Rapha=EBl_Rigo_LKML=3F=3D?= 
	<lkml@twilight-hall.net>,
       Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>, davids@webmaster.com,
       Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       Dmitry Torokhov <dtor_core@ameritech.net>
From: Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@mac.com>
Subject: Re: GPL Violation of 'sveasoft' with GPL Linux Kernel/Busybox +code
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 22:02:56 -0500
To: Michael Poole <mdpoole@troilus.org>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2952
Lines: 69

On Nov 09, 2004, at 21:01, Michael Poole wrote:
>> The penalty for exercising your GPL distribution right is losing your
>> $20 subscription.  I believe that such a penalty is a restriction on 
>> you
>> exercising your GPL rights.
>
> It is no such thing.
>
>   Restriction \Re*stric"tion\, n. [F. restriction, L. restrictio.]
>      1. The act of restricting, or state of being restricted;
>         confinement within limits or bounds.

The only "true" restrictions, by your definition, are the laws of 
physics. A
"law" passed by Congress is simply a piece of paper that the citizens of
the US agree to follow (transitively, because we agree with Congress
because we agree with the Constitution).  Various other "laws" specify
what punishments we may or may not receive if we do not follow those
laws.  My example is no less a restriction than those others, except 
that
it has a lesser punishment associated with it.

Also from dictionary.com:
> Main Entry: re?stric?tion
> Function: noun
> 	1: something that restricts: as
> 		a: a regulation that restricts or restrains
> 		b: a limitation on the use or enjoyment of property or a facility
I would call "If you distribute you lose your $20 subscription" a
"limitation", and it most certainly restricts my ability to use the 
kernel to
the fullest extent that the GPL provides.

> You can fully exercise your rights under the GPL; they are not
> restricted.  However, you cannot expect future support from Sveasoft.
But if I paid $20 for one year of said support?

> Only your contract entitles you to that support, and if you do
> something to terminate your contract, it is outside the GPL's scope.
What _is_ inside the GPL's scope is that no contract may require me
to abstain from my GPL rights.  If I use my full GPL rights, then they
are telling me that I break the contract and lose my $20 support.

> This is unpleasant for a lot of people.  It is probably suboptimal for
> the free software community.  Life can be hard like that.  Any
> competent lawyer could have a copyright infringement claim dismissed
> if the claim were based on your theory of the GPL.
As I said, IANAL, but I do feel strongly about this issue (though I've
never paid for their software).  In any case, I think this point will be
moot if SveaSoft continues with their announced plan to require an
activation key.  That would _definitely_ be against the GPL.

Cheers,
Kyle Moffett

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GCM/CS/IT/U d- s++: a17 C++++>$ UB/L/X/*++++(+)>$ P+++(++++)>$
L++++(+++) E W++(+) N+++(++) o? K? w--- O? M++ V? PS+() PE+(-) Y+
PGP+++ t+(+++) 5 X R? tv-(--) b++++(++) DI+ D+ G e->++++$ h!*()>++$ r  
!y?(-)
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/