On Tue, March 29, 2005 7:15 am, linux-os said:
> In the United States there is something called "restraint of trade".
> Suppose there was a long-time facility or API that got replaced
> with one that was highly restrictive. To use the new facility, one
> would have to buy a license or kiss somebody or something that
> was not previously required. If an action was brought against the
> person(s) who replaced the old facility with the new one, it
> is likely that the plaintiff would prevail.
>
> If there is documented proof that those symbols were previously
> available and then they were changed to something more restrictive,
> I think one would prevail if a complaint were brought in court.
>
> If course, you need to convince the person(s) who changed them
> that the action was unconscionable and therefore force them to
> change them back without making money for the lawyers by suing
> them. And, yes, somebody who modifies software in that manner
> can be sued. They could also be charged with criminal behavior
> (malicious mischief) in the State of Massachusetts or charged
> under federal law with restraint of trade. Modifying an existing
> policy to further an individual's ambitions can be fraught
> with consequences.
>
What the hell is this world coming to? Can we please just respect the
intent of the GPL and dispense with all this legalese crap; at least here
on LKML? People who want a free ride and don't care about returning
anything to the community that created Linux have many other forums in
which to vent.
Regards,
Sean
-
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]
