Alexander Terekhov wrote:
Hyman Rosen wrote:
[...]
I don't think that GPL's automatic termination is *effective* because
I believe that receiving a second copy reinstates the permissions, but
I do believe that the termination takes hold as specified.
LOL. Peace out, Hyman.
On page 38 of <http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/Doc-27.pdf>, lawyers
for IBM assert
Based on the misconduct described herein, SCO's rights to
distribute the copyrighted works of others included in Linux
under the GPL have been terminated pursuant to ยง4 of the GPL.
So, I have a choice. I can believe lawyers who work for one of
the largest companies in the world and have vast experience in
dealing with patent and copyright law, that the termination
clause is meaningful enough to be stated as a claim. Or I can
believe a crank on Usenet. I believe I'll go with the former.
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
