On Sun, 24 Dec 2000, Warner Losh wrote:
> : No. This issue was beaten to death multiple times, large amount of
> : software was created based on this, and its legality is absolutely
> : certain by now.
>
> No. You are wrong. The fact that large amounts of software has been
> created is irrelevant. The GPL has never been adjudicated. That is a
> fact. There is no legal precidence for any interpretation of its
> terms and conditions as written. Until such time as it is
> adjudicated, it is in doubt.
Everything is in doubt. Even the fact that I haven't killed you isn't
proven. And everyone can be sued for anything, even if it is perfectly
legal. That in no way negates the fact that tons of software coexist with
GPL'ed one, and it's accepted practice -- one that even lawyers and judges
have to respect.
> Like you've said, this had been beaten
> to death many times and I am quite sure of my facts. I have consulted
> with atterneys investigating the possibility of using Linux and the
> GPL of the kernel was a deal killer. It was too legally risky because
> of the multitude of authors of Linux and the possible interpretations
> of the GPL. That is the big reason why Linus' pronouncement on the
> issue isn't necessarily legally firm ground. Any one of those authors
> could challenge someone's non-release of driver source and have legal
> standing to bring the suit. Unless you get all the authors to agree
> to that, and the matter will remain risky.
Your attorneys are stupid.
--
Alex
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Excellent.. now give users the option to cut your hair you hippie!
-- Anonymous Coward
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
