Slashdot Mirror
Skype Gives Up Anti-GPL Appeal
l2718 writes "Yesterday we discussed Skype's appeal of a German court's ruling against them regarding a violation of the GPL. Harald Welte (the plaintiff) now reports in his blog that following oral argument, Skype decided to drop the appeal and accept the lower court ruling in Weite's favor. More details and analysis at Groklaw. Congratulations to Mr. Welte and GPL-violations.org!"
Is his name Welte or Weite?
"To all those who don't like the license: you don't have to use it. Just write your own code. But if you want to use GPL code, the license comes with it. It's a package deal. Thanks."
(which has been oft-said on /.)
$nice = $webHosting + $domainNames + $sslCerts
What GPL'd software did Skype use and how was it discovered that Skype was using it?
This ist the first time, a foreign firm loses in a German court in a GPL-related case. Furthermore, the judge pointed out that it is not sufficient to offer the related sources only on the internet and mention this in a rather general way in the product manual.
:-)
Go Harald
Regards
Stirz
Tell that to this Seal: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7379554.stm
Just like real life if you're smaller and on the bottom, you're screwed. Fortunately that wasn't the case for the article's penguin.
"Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much." - Oscar Wilde
for not being a prick and pushing the thing around like sco did.
Read radical news here
Shouldn't that be "don't fuck with the GNU"? I mean, I know people are hesitant to refer to the Free Software Foundation and use the term "open source" more often than "free software", but not referencing the GNU Project when talking about the GNU General Public License is pretty ridiculous. The penguin may have helped spread free software and all, but this isn't his fight.
This means that you get to see whatever GPL'd code Skype was using, and if they made changes to that code, they are required to release them as well under the GPL. You don't have access under the GPL to any of their other code that does not meet these conditions.
I don't normally go for those "there, fixed that fer ya" type posts, but it seems to me this is really what you are saying.
You are correct, the result of this decision may be that some people who were using GPL code in violation of the license will no longer do so, just as the announcement of Microsoft going after companies using unlicensed copies of their software may have a similar effect. How you feel about that really depends on how you feel about copyright in general.
I don't care why you're posting AC
After they got caught out, it went to court.
After some months toing and froing, Skype lost a lower court settlement.
Skype took it to a higher court.
Later that day, the appeals judge slaps them down, hard.
The next day, Skype drops the case.
Fixed that for you.
Did the slap down go along the lines of, "Well, since you believed the license which permitted you to make these copies to be invalid, each copy you made was intended to be a violation of the copyrights for this code. We could therefore start the settlement process by negotiating how many thousands of euros you'll pay per copy."?
I think it really should go something like that. If you think a license in invalid, you're not allowed to use the code under that license. Therefore, you have no license under which to use the code. So if you use the code anyway, you're purposefully committing copyright violations, just the same as if the license is valid and you don't live up to its terms.
Either way, they violated copyright. It's a damn poor argument to make that you thought you'd just use some code because you didn't think there was a valid license that gave you a right to use it.
IANAL, but I'll take a crack at that.
In the US, whatever you create is copyrighted by default. I believe it is easier to defend if you take the step of registering it, but as far as I know simply putting a copyright notice on it is sufficient. So I couldn't come along and take the code you published and use it in a project I intend to distribute without getting your permission.
"Getting your permission" is what abiding by the GPL amounts to. It says "this code is copyrighted. You may not redistribute it unless you agree to these terms
Unlike Microsoft-style EULAs, the GPL (as far as I know) does not have to be accepted by the user, as it really has nothing to do with the user (despite the fact that a lot of software out there makes you "accept" the GPL before installing it). You don't need to agree to anything to use emacs to write your novel, but if you want to include it in a software distribution, or use the source code within a project you are developing yourself, you need to get the permission of the copyright holder and agree to his terms. That means abiding by the GPL.
I don't care why you're posting AC
The code in question is the Linux Kernel. So the penguin and the gnu are both relevant.
So the penguin and the gnu are both relevant.
That's right. It's a tag-team match. And Skype's partner was a brain damaged lawyer who thought anti-trust arguments were worth even mentioning. While Tux pummeled Skype, the Gnu snuck up on the lawyer from behind and bashed him with a folding chair.
The enemies of Democracy are
You know what? I was going to try to tell you how wrong you were, and how you basically don't have any idea what you are talking about (or you do, so you know how to make sure everything you say is wrong).
But you know what? That's stupid. I'm not going to argue. You're right. You're absolutely right, the GPL will corrupt your code, your people, and your family. You will have to open source your bedroom activities, and invite RMS to watch. It's all true.
Because, frankly, I'm sick of companies who are too dumb to figure it out themselves, or too fucking retarded to hire the cheapest lawyer they can find to explain it to them if they can't figure it out for themselves, what exactly the GPL does and doesn't do. Cus if you can't figure it out, and are going to just assume whatever comes into your crack-damage brain (it'll pollute us all! no wait it's free we can do whatever we want!)... Then I don't want you using GPL code.
I mean seriously. If you can't figure out how maybe modifying the Linux kernel into your product means you have some obligations to follow vis-a-vis this free OS kernel you just picked up, and how this doesn't affect all the code you wrote that has nothing to do with the kernel... Then you are an idiot, your company deserves to fail, and I can only hope that your fear of using GPL software puts you at a competitive disadvantage and thus hastens that day.
So yes. GPL is viral. Pass it on.
The enemies of Democracy are