-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 01:09 am, Mark H. Wood wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Sep 2003, Brad Hards wrote:
> [snip]
>
> > It is probably cleaner to put the source code on the same disk. That way,
> > if it doesn't leak, you have no problems, and if it does leak, well you
> > might have problems with GPL negating some of your patents on those
> > protocols, but at least you aren't in direct copyright infringement.
>
> Whoa, IANAL either but my understanding of this is just the reverse: if
> you modify a GPL program and the mod.s are encumbered by patents or
> whatever, your patents are still OK but your redistribution rights under
> GPL are revoked. That is, it *is* a copyright violation but you *don't*
> damage your patent. GPL essentially says that you may not redistribute if
> you choose or are required to place restrictions on distribution which
> conflict with the rights granted by GPL. See section 7 (of GPL v2).
The GPL states that:
Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered
by this License; they are outside its scope. The act of running the Program
is not restricted, and the output from the Program is covered only if its
contents constitute a work based on the Program (independent of having been
made by running the Program). Whether that is true depends on what the
Program does.
- From that (and Section 4 and Section 5), I assume you can only perform
modifications in accordance with the GPL. Whether a plugin counts as
modification almost certainly depends.
> But please ask your lawyer if you want a legal opinion.
Of course!
> Sorry, but there's a lot of FUD out there about GPL damaging patents and I
> don't want it to get any worse. It's my understanding that patents can
> only be damaged by the discovery of prior art or the exercise of eminent
> domain.
OK. But if you modify GPL code and add material covered by patent, you have to
freely license that patent for everyone. Sure, its still your patent, and the
patent is "undamaged", but your ability to extract license fees may be
reduced. I see this as a good thing.
Brad
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE/XOuiW6pHgIdAuOMRAsNhAJ9tBIJB0xGrRzxFVAG1rEGnvMB0fwCcDqut
M5VKF2rA/j67y6VJfD85lSE=
=LP5v
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
