[luau] that crazy GPL stuff...

[Warren Togami]

Hawaii Linux Institute wrote:

> Warren Togami wrote:
> 
>> SCO
> 
> 
> We need to realize that the validity of GPL is closely tied to the 
> notion of shrink-wrap licenses.  There are two important issues.  First, 
> since there are no face-to-face negotiations, do you really need to 
> abide by the terms of GPL and open your source code?  If you have to 
> open your source code, to what extent?  Since there is no uniform law 
> regarding shrink-wrap licenses, answer to this question will of course 
> vary from state to state.  Then, there is the issue of whether the GPL 
> will bind you forever.  Both issues have been advanced by David Boise of 
> SCO.
> 

I don't pretend to truly understand this legal stuff, but I recall the 
FSF saying repeatedly, even long before this SCO mess that you do NOT 
need to agree to the terms of the GPL in order to USE GPL software.  The 
GPL only regulates what you can and cannot do in distribution.

> With regard to SCO,  AFAIK, the real issue is, whether Microsoft should 
> be allowed to essentially underwrite the entire cost of the law suit 
> under the color of a highly questionable licensing agreement.  A friend 
> in Massachusetts told me that some firms are considering filing a 
> federal RICO ( Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organization) law 
> suit naming Microsoft and SCO as co-defendants.  Now that should be 
> interesting.  wayne
> 

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20031016164004379
If that is the case, then perhaps these guys should be another 
co-defendant after investing $50 million in SCO.

Warren