On Fri, 2 Jul 2010 12:53:06 -0700
Ken Restivo <ken@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 07:19:07AM -0400, Paul Davis wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 7:13 AM, Nils Hammerfest <nils@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> >
> > > Now what happens? Of course the intial release was wrong and there will be legal consequences, no question. But what about the derived works and their derived works?
> >
> > there is no single answer to this. it would depend on national laws
> > (which vary) and it would depend on the particular case at hand. there
> > are examples i can imagine where in US law, the derived work would
> > immediately become as illegal as the initial work, but the
> > distributor(s) of the derived work would not have any liability. there
> > are other examples i can imagine where they clearly would.
> >
>
> This sounds similar to the Novell/SCO lawsuit against Linux some years ago.
>
> Novell claimed that there were Unix headers in Linux, thus they owned Linux.
>
> As I recall, Linus fought it and won the suit.
>
> -ken
You've got that arse about face. Novel has actually been the 'good guy'
here - see http://www.Groklaw.net and look for SCO in the side bar.
-- Will J Godfrey http://www.musically.me.uk Say you have a poem and I have a tune. Exchange them and we can both have a poem, a tune, and a song. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-userReceived on Sat Jul 3 00:15:02 2010
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Jul 03 2010 - 00:15:02 EEST