Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Bernhard R. Link <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> * Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [040915 19:31]: >>> RMS is quoted as saying "Misusing a GPL-covered program permanently >>> forfeits the right to distribute the code at all", which implies that >>> the GPL doesn't protect the rights of people who have violated it in the >>> past. >> >> The GPL still protects the rights of those, only not to this specific >> code. You still have rights to use any other GPLed code, even from the >> same author. > > So you'd have no objection to licenses which terminate the copyright > license to that specific bit of code in the event of patent action? (The > MPL is an example of one of these)
No. The GPL terminates only for non-compliance, and places no restrictions beyond those imposed by law. That's free. Attempts to bargain in a license, to say "I'll give you a license to this stuff, but only if you give me a license to stuff you already own" are non-free. All this messing about with termination clauses is just an attempt to strike that bargain. It's a pretty fair bargain, too -- it's just not free. I don't see any free way of terminating a license for reasons other than non-compliance. -Brian -- Brian Sniffen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
