Re: A weak link in the license chain: Releasing on false assumptions?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 07:19:07AM -0400, Paul Davis wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 7:13 AM, Nils Hammerfest <nils@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > Now what happens? Of course the intial release was wrong and there will be legal consequences, no question. But what about the derived works and their derived works?
> 
> there is no single answer to this. it would depend on national laws
> (which vary) and it would depend on the particular case at hand. there
> are examples i can imagine where in US law, the derived work would
> immediately become as illegal as the initial work, but the
> distributor(s) of the derived work would not have any liability. there
> are other examples i can imagine where they clearly would.
> 

This sounds similar to the Novell/SCO lawsuit against Linux some years ago.

Novell claimed that there were Unix headers in Linux, thus they owned Linux.

As I recall, Linus fought it and won the suit.

-ken
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Sound]     [ALSA Users]     [Pulse Audio]     [ALSA Devel]     [Sox Users]     [Linux Media]     [Kernel]     [Photo Sharing]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Media]

  Powered by Linux