Re: Possible GPL Violation of Linux in Amstrad's E3 Videophone

["Jeff V. Merkey" <jmerkey@drdos.com>]

Jon Masters wrote:

>>Then anyone who uses the code in a commerical enterprise will be required to get a
>>license, and you can actually do something about it.
>>    
>>
>
>They have a license. If they distribute products then they are bound
>by the terms of the GPL and this is a pretty obvious license.
>
>  
>
Try enforcing it in court when they get a dozen of their engineers to 
lie and state they reviewed the code on one terminal and
converted it by writing new code on another. There's no moral anything 
with some of these big companies and their employees
will say whatever they have to. I've been there, in the real world, all 
GPL means is you are giving away your IP to whomever is running
whatever effort and you have little recourse. The GPL is tough to 
enforce the way its worded for individuals. There's too much
wiggle room for people to use. Alan Cox in a previous email basically 
stated, " they are being nice and answering emails." Doesn't look
like it takes much for these people to smooch and kiss up to folks. They 
will always come back to the table like foxes from the
henhouse, with chicken feathers all over their lips saying "show me the 
chickens."

>>Oops.  Too late.  Linux has a huge trail of everyone's code under the GPL so you cannot
>>re-release the code under another license unless the entire code base is re-written.
>>    
>>
>
>Pretty cool stuff huh?
>  
>

Yep.

Jeff