On Jun 15, 2007, Al Viro <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 06:04:33PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> > No specific case law, but I'd expect serious [eventual] trouble for
>> > somebody trying to slap some different license in such case.
>>
>> Consider this (to make the freeing-the-lion story short):
>>
>> Jar file with .class files, with a copy of LGPL in the root of the
>> tree. No other license anywhere to be seen. Is it safe to assume
>> the whole thing is under the LGPL?
> It certainly sounds like a reasonable first assumption; unless you are
> aware of couterexamples, you probably would be able at least to prove
> that you've acted in good faith if somebody starts to complain. IANAL,
> obviously, so ask FSF lawyers. Really. Especially if you are doing that
> for a text associated with FSF-LA in any way. That's what they are for.
I've covered my grounds and talked to lawyers in Brazil, where this
all happened. But it wouldn't hurt me to have cases of law abroad,
which is why I asked.
--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
