[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Always free?

On Fri, Feb 07, 2003 at 10:29:58AM +0200, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
> IANAL but this has been discussed extensively in for example Slashdot,

Not the best place for legal analysis, but then I suppose this list is
only marginally better.  :)

> and the current theory of licensing in the US and probably in EU as
> well is that a non-profit license can be revoked. It would mean that
> the copies in existence would stay legal but you couldn't distribute
> them any longer. The key here is that if the licensee compensates the
> licenser in any way, then the license can not be revoked, but if no
> compensation is made, then the license may be revoked by the licenser
> at will.

Well, wouldn't you say that gratis QA, bugfixes, and enhancements to the
code under reciprocal terms count as a form of consideration?

Of course, my logic doesn't apply to freely-licensed software that is
bug-free and never patched, but that's a pretty small domain.

G. Branden Robinson                |     One man's "magic" is another man's
Debian GNU/Linux                   |     engineering.  "Supernatural" is a
branden@debian.org                 |     null word.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |     -- Robert Heinlein

Attachment: pgpAw4hhTRZiq.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: