[linux-elitists] The SCO teleconference

Martin Pool mbp@sourcefrog.net
Thu Aug 14 19:15:14 PDT 2003

On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 15:37:36 -0700
Rick Moen <rick@linuxmafia.com> wrote:

> 1.  GPL is a grant of additional conditional rights under copyright
> law. 2   It's difficult to imagine a judge declaring it void without
> declaring
>     the entire basis of copyright void, however:
> 3.  If a judge does so, and is confirmed on appeal, then all covered
>     property reverts to a default Copyright Act grant, i.e., without
>     right to create derivative works or redistribute.  Thereupon:
> 4.  Copyright holders would then issue a new instance under some
>     different licence not having whatever defect the judge found GPLv2
>     to have.

It's hard to perceive from the quotes, but they might be arguing against
the GPL in a different way:

Although SCO distributed their source under the GPL, which fairly
clearly says redistribution is permitted, that isn't what they really
*meant*.  SCO *meant* that you were only allowed to make one backup
for your own personal use, because that is common practice for
software under copyright law.

I can't imagine any judge concluding their intention was so wildly at
odds with the language.  But somehow or other SCO have to come to
grips with the fact that they distributed the kernel source
themselves, and perhaps this is their best attempt.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://allium.zgp.org/pipermail/linux-elitists/attachments/20030815/2124f779/attachment.pgp 

More information about the linux-elitists mailing list