Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

GPL Violators On The Prowl

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the neither-rain-nor-snow-nor-hail-nor-packetstorm dept.

ravenII writes "GPL Violations.org are looking after the GPL. Warning letters were personally handed over to companies at their CeBIT booths by Mr. Harald Welte, free software developer and founder of the gpl-violations.org project. It seems big boys like Motorola, Acer, AOpen, Micronet, Buffalo and Trendware seem to violate GPL. Please visit the site for more information on GPL enforcements and violators."

4 of 636 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Ooohhh.. Leters! by tabkey12 · · Score: 5, Informative
    Well, actually if you looked at their site you would find that they have already had considerable success against companies such as Asus & Sitecom

    Remember kids, read before you post!

    --
    Get a free iPod Nano 4GB!
  2. Mirror link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Since it looks like GPL violator's website is down, here's a mirror:
    http://mirrordot.org/stories/c00f3d2fd6588c34ae25f f3409b0475e/index.html

  3. Re:No teeth by why-lurk · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you RTFA, you would see that Harald Welte is a developer and copyright holder of netfilter, which is used in a number of commercial firewall products. He also has license to prosecute the copyrights of some other developers.

    So yes, he has standing to both warn and sue the companies he has given notice to (as well as the companies that have settled with gpl-violations.org).

    --kirby

  4. Copyright does not need a contract by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    If I were to sell copies of Star Trek DVDs that I made myself, Paramount would be all over me for violating their copyright. I have no contract with Paramount. That's the point - I have NO right to sell someone else's copyrighted material without permission. You must have permission to distribute ('publish') someone else's copyrighted material.

    That permission could be given by a contract. Or it could be given by a license, such as the GPL. When the author places his work under the GPL, he grants permission to copy to those who adhere to the terms of the GPL. If someone doesn't follow the terms, then they DON'T have permission to distribute the copyrighted materials. It's a simple case of copyright infringement.

    The GPL is far simpler than the usual EULA. The GPL makes no restriction on use, but most EULAs do. Most EULAs prohibit copying, but the GPL encourages it. The GPL is a license granting you permissions that you wouldn't otherwise have under copyright law. You don't have to accept the GPL, you just fall back on standard copyright law if you don't. No contract is needed.