[linux-elitists] SCO licences unnecessary?
Tue Aug 5 21:06:10 PDT 2003
Suspending disbelief, let's assume that there really is some amount of
proprietary SCO code in the kernel, and that it has not already been
licenced by SCO under the GPL. (I can't see how, but let's pretend.)
Under yesterday's plan, SCO think they are being clever by asking for
licence fees without themselves distributing Linux and therefore
breaching the GPL. They are granting "right to use" licences to
end-users without the right to modify or redistribute.
As far as I know, there is no concept of "right to use" in copyright
law. As Eben Moglen wrote, "In general, users of copyrighted works do
not need licenses..."
People who are only using Linux and not distributing it -- the only
people who SCO are now threatening -- seem to be the ones who have
exactly nothing to fear.
More information about the linux-elitists