Re: Patent clauses in licenses
* Andrew Suffield:
> Termination for non-compliance, in a publically redistributed work, is
> just a reflection of copyright law; it doesn't really change what you
> can and can't do.
We now have a (lower) German court ruling that this isn't the case,
i.e. that the termination clause is effective and you can't just get
another copy of the same work. It's rather surprising because it
conflicts with our equivalent of the first-sale doctrine and
contradicts the widely held belief that EULAs are ineffective, so I
have mixed feelings about this.
I think that the GPL clause in question isn't one of its stronger
ones, and I suppose I could live without it, but I don't think it
renders the license non-free.
Reply to: