Mac wrote: > You do have to hand it to Richard Stallman, Eben Moglen and their > colleagues - the genius evident in GPLv3 just takes your breath away: > > http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/blogs/microsoft_the_copyright_infringer > > http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070709101318827 > > > Mac > > I'm no lawyer, but in the UK at least, there are at least two problems with the "legal analysis" here:
- I had understood that a new contract / law could never apply retroactively. I believe that the same applies in the US. - I had understood that a contract could not be used to cause a party to commit a criminal offence. In the UK at least, such a contract term would be struck down by the courts (and usually, any contract would include a clause that explicitly said that if one part of the contract were found to be illegal, the rest still stood.) On the first, the GPLv3 may indeed prevent Microsoft continuing to sell Novell / SuSE vouchers, but cannot be used to trigger Federal proceedings against Microsoft for vouchers sold prior to the new version of the GPL. Analogy: smoking in public became illegal in the UK on the 1st July, but this doesn't mean that smokers can be prosecuted for smoking in a pub on the 30th June, nor can pubs be prosecuted for having smoking areas up till that date. On the second, there is a real danger of a backlash here. Example: - Microsoft sells (legally) voucher - Customer buys voucher - Customer waits 6 months - Customer tries to cash in voucher for use on a GPL3 product - Novell says "Sorry, but owing to the licence used on that GPL3 product, it would cause a breach of Federal Law for us to provide this support. Please choose a non-GPL3 product." Fundamental principle of marketing - it doesn't matter what's "true" - all that matters is what your customer believes! Mark -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.kubuntu.org/UKTeam/
