Talk:Problems with free software and open source models: Difference between revisions
Talk:Problems with free software and open source models (edit)
Revision as of 21:50, 27 April 2004
, 27 April 2004no edit summary
(don't think second point is valid) |
No edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
Issue #2 in the main article is not valid. Where does anybody get the idea that nobody can sue under the GPL? The copyright holder has the power to sue. Just like under any other license. (IANAL, etc.) Eric119 [[User:209.145.192.46|209.145.192.46]] 05:14, 24 Mar 2004 (EET) | Issue #2 in the main article is not valid. Where does anybody get the idea that nobody can sue under the GPL? The copyright holder has the power to sue. Just like under any other license. (IANAL, etc.) Eric119 [[User:209.145.192.46|209.145.192.46]] 05:14, 24 Mar 2004 (EET) | ||
:Who "the copyright holder" is, and where they get the money or help to sue, is often up in the air. FSF doesn't pursue every case, and has no grounds to even ask contributors to GPL projects to help it contribute. The "power" to sue is not real if there is no resource base, no [[self-funding]]. Yes this could be better stated, but don't pretend that FSF actually really sues people and ever gets them to cease or desist anything. The point is valid even if the wording is not. There are many known GPL abusers and the FSF simply has no power to stop them, and that's in part due to lack of [[self-funding]]. | |||
:It's true though that [[GFDL]] makes the copyright holder even more ambiguous and really does make it quite impossible to sue. At least according to James Day and other lawyers who've looked at the problem. A lot of people now prefer [[Creative Commons]] for this very reason, as it has at least a minimal consortium put together. | |||
::(Sorry for taking so long to respond to this, but for the past month or so I was told this wiki was broken. Just today I discovered that it was at a new URL.) The FSF disagrees with you that it cannot stop GPL violators [http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/enforcing-gpl.html <nowiki>[1]</nowiki>]. It is quite true there have been no lawsuits, but that it because everyone the FSF talked to decided to stop without one. They also say they are quite capable of suing if anyone should dare to break the copyright on FSF software. Who exactly are these GPL abusers that the FSF is ignoring? | |||
::Your comments discuss ''only'' the FSF, which I did not mention. Even if the FSF had problems, it would not mean that all people who hold GPL copyrights had problems. There is no apparent connection with a company having the funds to sue and the licenses of its software products. The GFDL is also irrelevant to the matter. Eric119 [[User:209.145.192.46|209.145.192.46]] 00:50, 28 Apr 2004 (EEST) | |||