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

Re: DRAFT: debian-legal summary of the QPL



On Mon, Jul 19, 2004 at 08:50:18PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 19, 2004 at 10:34:57AM -0800, D. Starner wrote:
> > > What request ? And i doubt you can prove to the judge you ever made that
> > > request to me.

> > "I bought a commerical on cable asking for modifiers to send me their
> > changes. I believe he was watching at that time." Then, since you have
> > no right to stay silent in civil court, the judge can turn to you and
> > ask you if you were watching. Are you really advocating that someone
> > commit perjury in that case?

> Sorry, but i don't believe such a request is legally binding. If the upstream
> author has money to throw away then fine, but he should as well have sent
> someone with a written request to the modificator, and thus obtaining legal
> proof of the offer.

> Also, i think only the silliest of judge would consider this kind of question
> acceptable and even start a judgement over this kind of claims.

Only of the silliest of copyright holders would not make sure to send
you a written request, sent by some means considered legally reliable,
before taking this before a judge.  So even if you missed the TV ad,
there'd still be a request you would be answerable for.

But the big issue here is still that if the license is only free because
you won't get *caught* violating it, it's not free.

-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: