laforge at openmoko.org
Wed Mar 14 17:53:32 CET 2007
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 09:51:37AM -0700, Martin Lefkowitz wrote:
> I disagree with that premise that it is a nasty legal area.
> Modules can be proprietary this is a fact.
> Not only have I been directly involved in the development of such, but
> have talked to people that did serious research on what is legal and
> what isn't.
As you might be aware, I am myself heading the
http://gpl-violations.org/ project, and in this process and function
talking to many technical and legal experts in this area.
And there is _nothing_ that is more of an indication of a grey area if
* you can find many lawyers and scientific legal researchers pro and con
* you cannot find any evidence anywhere on the world on any of this
> If it were not then everybody would have already sued everybody.
I am doing my best. And I would have probably dealt with more than 120
cases (only a hand full had to go to court) if I didn't have this
strange habit of doing actual development rather than just dealing with
> it's only linksys that had to disclose their WRT54g code
Whihc is obviously wrong and outdated information.
> I can almost guarantee you that no chip company is going to open
> themselves up to that.
That is not the point. You can never sue somebody to release their
proprietary source code. But you can halt their sales by halting them
from further distributing a gpl infringing product.
And I have hard evidence in my own hands that this works ;)
- Harald Welte <laforge at openmoko.org> http://openmoko.org/
Software for the world's first truly open Free Software mobile phone
More information about the community