Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965068AbWHULbg (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Aug 2006 07:31:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965066AbWHULbg (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Aug 2006 07:31:36 -0400 Received: from hp3.statik.TU-Cottbus.De ([141.43.120.68]:6273 "EHLO hp3.statik.tu-cottbus.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965068AbWHULbf (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Aug 2006 07:31:35 -0400 Message-ID: <44E998AF.7040907@s5r6.in-berlin.de> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 13:27:43 +0200 From: Stefan Richter User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.8.0.5) Gecko/20060721 SeaMonkey/1.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Helge Hafting CC: Chase Venters , Helge Hafting , David Schwartz , alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: GPL Violation? References: <1155919950.30279.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060819113052.GC3190@aitel.hist.no> <200608192220.42456.chase.venters@clientec.com> <44E9678A.7050704@aitel.hist.no> In-Reply-To: <44E9678A.7050704@aitel.hist.no> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1524 Lines: 34 Helge Hafting wrote: [...] > Yes the GPL is a licence. By using the code, they have accepted > the licence. If I use a copy of windows, I'll be forced to pay. > The reason courts usually award monetary damages is that > money is what almost everybody wants. Commercial software, > books, CDs, DVSs are all traded for money, so copying one > means you must pay the copyright holder's loss. > > The GPL should work exactly the same way: You distribute > software derived from GPL software, you pay the usual price. > But the usual price for GPLed software is not money, > the usual price is the derived source. [...] > if someone tries to be difficult, I hope > they'll be forced to pay the usual price - which isn't money. > It'd be hard to set a price anyway, given that GPL software > isn't usually sold. The price of having a professional programmer > developing the same driver perhaps? There may also be damage due to unfair competition. But then the plaintiff probably had to be a competitor (or perhaps a body that is generally entitled to go against unfair competition, if such a body exists anywhere). The copyright holders of relevant parts of Linux may sometimes not be competitors to the violator. -- Stefan Richter -=====-=-==- =--- =-=-= http://arcgraph.de/sr/ - 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/