Hi,
Am So, den 23.11.2003 schrieb Anthony DeRobertis um 04:44:
> On Thu, 2003-11-20 at 15:51, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> > Compare to this: You give a text to a newspaper with this "licence":
> > * you may read it
> > * you may print it
> > Then there is no way I can stop them from printing, after we both
> > accepted these conditions.
> What law, exactly, would you accuse them of violating?
I can't name one, but I think if the way they hand me the product and
the GPL, the GPL is binding. A better example:
Company B produces some kind of Sweets. Because the packaging is not
very large, they put a note on it "for a descriptions of the
ingredients, mail us this way and we will send them to you". Then they
sell or give away (doesn't matter) some sweets. Can't I then rely that
the note on the packaging is correct?
Now compare Atmel: They give me the binary with a note (called GPL),
that I can get the source code from then, the next 2 years at the
expense of the copying (or something like that). If they don't do that,
they are misleading the customer.
What if I chose their product because their firmware was GPL, and the
competitor's product wasn't? Then the competitor could sue them for what
is called "unlauterer Wettbewerb" in Germany (unfair competition
according to "translate").
nomeata
--
Joachim "nomeata" Breitner
e-Mail: mail@joachim-breitner.de | Homepage: http://www.joachim-breitner.de
JID: joachimbreitner@amessage.de | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C | ICQ#: 74513189
Geekcode: GCS/IT/S d-- s++:- a--- C++ UL+++ P+++ !E W+++ N-- !W O? M?>+ V?
PS++ PE PGP++ t? 5? X- R+ tv- b++ DI+ D+ G e+>* h! z?
Bitte senden Sie mir keine Word- oder PowerPoint-Anhänge.
Siehe http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.de.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil