[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: GPL Mere Aggregation question

From: rjack
Subject: Re: GPL Mere Aggregation question
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2007 16:28:56 -0500
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20071031) wrote:

I have a commercial application that is distributed packaged in an
installer that you can download. When a user installs the application
I wanted to install some GPL software at the same time.

There was once a company called SCO that decided to to mix the GPL license in with its commercial software transactions. SCO in bankruptcy.

Four more companies who mixed GPL software into their commercial businesses have had GPL intimidation lawsuits filed against them in the last sixty days.

The people who wrote the GPL (the Free Software Foundation) still swear
"Licenses are not contracts" -- even though eighty years of unbroken case law precedent from the Supreme Court on down says otherwise.

If you violate a socialist belief of a GPL author you're going to end up in Federal Court because you used their license. Do you really want to trust your commercial business to license interpretations written by Marxist crackpots?

Hint: No one has ever been sued under a BSD-style or Apache open source license. Wake up and smell the coffee.

rjack :)

--- "Whether express or implied, a license is a contract 'governed by ordinary principles of state contract law.'"; McCoy v. Mitsuboshi Cutlery, Inc., 67. F.3d 917, (United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 1995) ---

--- "Although the United States Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. ยงยง 101- 1332, grants exclusive jurisdiction for infringement claims to the federal courts, those courts construe copyrights as contracts and turn to the relevant state law to interpret them."; Automation by Design, Inc. v. Raybestos Products Co., 463 F.3d 749, (United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit 2006) ---

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]