Re: GNU licenses

[Alexander Terekhov]

John Hasler wrote:
> 
> Merijn de Weerd writes:
> > The big question is: with the paragraph above, is the sole cause of
> > action "breach of license" or is a separate action for copyright
> > infringement also possible?
> 
> Action for copyright infringement is the only action.
> 
> > If someone accepts a license, then does not adhere to the terms, your
> > sole action is to sue for breach. You can't say he is infringing, since
> > you licensed him to do the acts. He just does not adhere to your
> > conditions.
> 
> No.  You file against him for copyright infringement.  You don't mention
> the license.  

You need to contact IBM's legal counsel and set them straight before
they further embarrass themselves, retard. IBM's SIXTH COUNTERCLAIM 
Breach of the GNU General Public License. No violation of the copyright 
act is alleged. "SCO accepted the terms of the GPL... IBM is entitled 
to a declaration that SCO's rights under the GPL terminated, an 
injunction prohibiting SCO from its continuing and threatened breaches 
of the GPL and an award of damages in an amount to be determined at 
trial."

Now, later IBM also nicely trolled SCO with Moglen's "retroactive
copyright infringement" theory (in another counterclaim which was 
asserted a month or two later). I suggest you read SCO's reply.  

regards,
alexander.