> OTOH, having exclusive copyright means you can more successfully defend that
> copyright. If someone took a copy of the linux kernel and used it in a
> blatently non-GPL compliant way, who could sue?
At least one opinion is that everyone whose code is used would be entitled
to sue the offender if they shipped a full GPL kernel. Think "class action"
When people start linking with fragments of the kernel and the like it
gets much more complicated, and depends upon whom.
On the bright side nowdays people you may have on the copyright
enforcing side of a kernel dispute include IBM, HP, Compaq, AMI, LSI,
Cirrus Logic, AMD, Intel, .... none of whom I suspect would ever have
signed copyrights over to the FSF.
> Since I don't think anyone has registered the copyright for the kernel
> no-one would be eligable for statutory damages and actual damages is zero.
This is not neccessary in most civilised countries, and in fact the current
US policy seems very suspect when compared to current WIPO treaties. Things
like the DMCA also changed the rules a little.
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Feb 23 2002 - 21:00:18 EST