law is not such a high above religion or a well hidden secret. you can read about court decisions, there are some videos on google at al, so I can only encourage everybody to start reading. plus: things are really changing and adapting to new situations (although slowly). but courts are aware of new forms of groupings and common workflows. usually such cases can't be generalized. like if you use software which is released under uncertain licences, then the court will look at for which purpose did you use the software, how big was the market effect (like did you make money with it, or did the author lose money by the infringement). and so on. It is true that laws are different in different countries, but for me it is also true that we live in civilized cultures and there is a "feeling" for what is right and what not... marius.
there is also a problem that who will be sueing when some
On Mar 8, 2007, at 5:14 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Chris McCormick wrote:
What does it mean if they violate the GPL and do so anyway? What does it mean for people who use the software?
the problem is, that asking this questions is not as simple (i think, being no lawyer myself).
it is rather: what does it mean to ... in the US? what does it meant to ... in austria? what does it meant to ... in germany? and so forth.
(there probably (but who knows...) will be little differences between the austrian and german legal state, but i am pretty sure that there will be major differences between the anglo-american and the european way. (and other ways too, but about these i know even less)
I think that they are not as big as you'd guess because there are international treaties that are all about making these laws work in the same ways across borders. Copyright, patents, and trademarks act quite similarly in all countries that participate in these treaties (which is most).
It's confusing, which is why a real lawyer is needed to answer these questions.
this is why it would require a host of lawyers. and that is the fun part of all this.
things are certainly better in CreativeCommons (among other things because they are less u.s.-centric than the FSF).
Hmm, that's debatable. They don't have a license without an attribution clause, it's not even an option. And the CC attribution clause is much worse than the BSD attribution clause ever was.
.hc
mfgasd.r IOhannes
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/ listinfo/pd-list
http://at.or.at/hans/
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-
marius schebella