Wed Aug 22 22:01:01 2001
Werner Koch wrote:
> Well I do not think it is a good idea to tell people to use an illegal
> piece of software. People may start to use it and later NAI goes
> after *them*.
A negligible chance IMO. Probably just as negligible that Ascom would go
after private users of IDEA who also use it for their buissiness mails.
> To clean up the situation, you may want to get a statement from NAI
> that they accept the modifications of their software and allow the
> distribution of it.
With current management closing the source, I doubt you will get such a
> The GNU project relies on the copyright law (although we think that
> it is wrong) to protect the GPLed software. We can't say we don't
> care about proprietary liceses and use them as we will, because then
> we don't have the moral right to enforce the GPL.
Is there any known case where the GNU copyright was tested in court against
an individual user who broke the terms? Like, say, a shareware author who
linked against a GPL (not LGPL) library? Or even against a company?
On a personal note, I agree with you that copyrights are wrong. But using
the same copyright law to ensure open source is IMO only one of the possible
actions to take to undermine it. Constantly breaking it and getting away
with it is another way to show the futility of the current copyright laws.
ir. J.C.A. Wevers // Physics and science fiction site:
email@example.com // http://www.xs4all.nl/~johanw/index.html
PGP/GPG public keys at http://www.xs4all.nl/~johanw/pgpkeys.html