[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GPL and other licences
From: |
Alexander Terekhov |
Subject: |
Re: GPL and other licences |
Date: |
Tue, 31 Jan 2006 18:43:44 +0100 |
David Kastrup wrote:
[...]
> Wallace gets a last chance, but the court has not even found enough
> merit in Wallace's ramblings to even start proper proceedings.
"By making certain software programs available to users at no charge,
the GPL may be discouraging developers from creating new and better
programs because they will not receive compensation for their work,
thereby reducing the number of quality programs available to users.
This may be considered anticompetitive effect, and it certainly can
be inferred from what Mr. Wallace alleges in his Third Amended
Complaint. Therefore, this court finds that the Third Amended
Complaint states a claim for violation of Section 1 of the Sherman
Act, under the rule of reason doctrine."
>
> > We'll see much more FSF's blood this time, I think.
>
> Well, we certainly can't see any less.
See above.
regards,
alexander.
- Re: GPL and other licences, (continued)
Re: GPL and other licences, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/01/31
- Re: GPL and other licences, David Kastrup, 2006/01/31
- Re: GPL and other licences, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/01/31
- Re: GPL and other licences, David Kastrup, 2006/01/31
- Re: GPL and other licences, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/01/31
- Re: GPL and other licences, David Kastrup, 2006/01/31
- Re: GPL and other licences, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/01/31
- Re: GPL and other licences, David Kastrup, 2006/01/31
- Re: GPL and other licences,
Alexander Terekhov <=
- Re: GPL and other licences, David Kastrup, 2006/01/31
- Re: GPL and other licences, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/01/31
Re: GPL and other licences, Barry Margolin, 2006/01/31