Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 24th Nov 2006 23:05 UTC, submitted by SEJeff
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu Mark Shuttleworth is trying to entice OpenSUSE developers to join Ubuntu. "Novell's decision to go to great lengths to circumvent the patent framework clearly articulated in the GPL has sent shockwaves through the community. If you are an OpenSUSE developer who is concerned about the long term consequences of this pact, you may be interested in some of the events happening next week as part of the Ubuntu Open Week."
Thread beginning with comment 185318
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: GPL software users
by nicolasb on Sat 25th Nov 2006 15:17 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: GPL software users"
Member since:

NVidia isn't distributing the driver with the kernel linked. They are merely distruting a blob and a wrapper.

What is illegal is to distribute the nvidia driver already linked with the kernel.

What the user at home or at work does is no one business.
But if a distributor links the driver with the kernel and ships it, it's illegal, period. They don't have the right to do it.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: GPL software users
by dylansmrjones on Sat 25th Nov 2006 18:20 in reply to "RE[3]: GPL software users"
dylansmrjones Member since:

It is not necessarily illegal. It depends on how the linking happens. _If_ the binary blob links to the wrapper it's illegal, but if it's the wrapper that links to the binary blob it'll be perfectly legal.

And distributing the binary blob along side the kernel is under no circumstances illegal, if the blob hasn't been installed. One could download the driver-package from nVidia, put it on an install-cd and unpack the driver during installation. In that case it will be perfectly legal, since the source wrapper hasn't been compiled yet, and the binary blob links to nothing.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: GPL software users
by nicolasb on Sat 25th Nov 2006 18:52 in reply to "RE[4]: GPL software users"
nicolasb Member since:

I'd really like to see someone like you facing an attorney.

"Hey, they just put bittorrent links of Windows Vista ! they aren't distributing it, i swear! it's just Links"

You won't go very far with this kind of defense. Don't try to circumvent the GPL. Putting this on the install CD and automagically installing it without having the user doing it all by himself is clearly illegal.

The law doesn't care of the details, they care about the intentions. You can get your ass raped for having put a .torrent of something illegal. Why it should be different when someone is getting cute with the GPL ?

I'm tired of seeing all those people who's only goal on their pitiful life is not respecting the license of the programs they use. If you don't like what the GPL mean, you are free to use something else, we won't miss you.

Microsoft and Apple EULA are waiting for you.

Read this.

" Now, if you're a certain type of business sharpie, you may thumb your nose and say, so sue me. And indeed that is a tempting possibility. But before you insist, ask yourself this: if two parties go to court in a dispute, and one party says, we knew about the license, and we knew what the terms were, and we deliberately couched our agreement to bypass the clear purpose and the intent of the license when we thought we'd figured out a loophole, do you really believe for a minute that any court of equity will endorse such behavior? "

Truth is, you loose. You can't do something like that, period.

Edited 2006-11-25 18:57

Reply Parent Score: 1