On 3/11/21 02:12, Dirk RIEHLE wrote:
https://www.natlawreview.com/article/gpl-open-source-litigation-could-open-door-to-other-suits
or similar in which the SFC sues Vizio over GPLv2 violation from the position
of consumer protection, not from the position of an original rights holder.
According to the article, this is a novel approach, and if it works out, would
(indeed) greatly increase who has standing to sue.
This is spectacular. In >2 decades of open source advocacy, it never,
ever occurred to me to treat the harm done to the recipients of modified
copyleft software without access to the modifications as standing. There
seems no impediment in principle; whether it will stand up in a
particular jurisdiction is an open question; this case may provide an
answer.
The point that software freedom for the user of the device, control of
personal data collected/processed by the device, and right to repair are
all important values for the owner/user of the device is so obvious that
I've even spoken on the first two
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNRN70XrLhs> but the idea that
violating these values might both give rise standing by the same party
just hadn't occurred to me.
- Roland
_______________________________________________
The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not
necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the
Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address.
License-discuss mailing list
License-discuss@lists.opensource.org
http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
