[linux-elitists] SCO claims the GPL is invalid...?
Karsten M. Self
Fri Aug 15 03:17:49 PDT 2003
on Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 07:44:43AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet (firstname.lastname@example.org) wrote:
> It's in the Inquirer, so it must be true:
> 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.
> (What is it about web writing that decrees that paragraphs shall be one
> sentence long?)
Don't complain. They could be Germans.
I think it's an AP / newspaper style thing. Note how long paragraphs
are in a standard bit of newspaper copy sometime.
WRT the issue of GPL validity in light of 17 USC 117:
Though I don't particularly care to comment on German language reporting
of legal arguments I've not seen.
Karsten M. Self <email@example.com> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
Scandinavian Designs: Cool furniture, affordable prices, great service,
satisfied customer. http://www.scandinaviandesigns.com/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://allium.zgp.org/pipermail/linux-elitists/attachments/20030815/11c57849/attachment.pgp
More information about the linux-elitists