[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- ACT's reaction
From: |
Alexander Terekhov |
Subject: |
Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- ACT's reaction |
Date: |
Sat, 07 Apr 2007 11:05:11 +0200 |
http://www.actonline.org/documents/ACT-GPLv3-Legal-Risks.pdf
(GPLv3: The Legal Risks of Overreaching for Third Party Patent Rights)
<quote>
At some point, efforts to block patent licenses that are legally
entered into and fully consistent with contract law, as well as the
intellectual property laws enacted by Congress, begin to expose those
developing and agreeing to GPLv3 to potential defenses and
counterclaims, including but not limited to the following.
- First, efforts by non-parties to force or induce a party to abrogate
a validly entered into contract or forego entering into a prospective
contract can give rise to a cause of action for tortious interference.
- Second, concerted agreements among competing providers of Linux
software and associated services to refuse to enter into license
agreements with a patent holder, or to refuse to supply Linux software
as punishment for any company that does so, can give rise to antitrust
liability under a group boycott theory.
- Third, efforts to use copyrights in order to control subject matter
such as patent rights that are outside the scope of statutory copyrights
can give rise to claims for copyright misuse that would block all
enforcement of such copyrights until the misuse is purged.
The basis for exposure under each of these theories is set forth briefly
in the following sections. What is evident from the analysis of each of
these three theories is the effort by the FSF to set itself above the
general tort, antitrust, and intellectual property laws to attack the
patent system. They dont have the power to legislate, however; that is
left to national legal systems that are subject to relevant international
norms. Not having the power to legislate, the FSF sets out to undermine
those laws they deem inconvenient to their purposes rather than working
through the system to effect the change they desire.
</quote>
See also
http://www.actonline.org/documents/GPLv3-License-or-Contract.pdf
(GPLv3 is a Contract and Why it Matters)
I just can't wait for next round of amusing bullshiting from Eben and
his underlings. Kudos to ACT.
regards,
alexander.
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- "additional permissions" [lgpl3-dd2], Alexander Terekhov, 2007/04/03
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- ACT's reaction,
Alexander Terekhov <=
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- ACT: Perens Invokes the Nuh Uh! Defense, Calls Us Names, Alexander Terekhov, 2007/04/11
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- ACT: Perens Invokes the Nuh Uh! Defense, Calls Us Names, Richard Tobin, 2007/04/11
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- DeLong: "TOP 10 REASONS WHY SOFTWARE ENGINEERS SHOULD BE WARY OF GPLv3", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/04/21
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- DeLong: "TOP 10 REASONS WHY SOFTWARE ENGINEERS SHOULD BE WARY OF GPLv3", penguin, 2007/04/23
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Healy: "FSF betrays its followers with GPL v3", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/04/24
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Eben's "Life After GPLv3", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/04/25
- Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Laurie: "Moglen Celebrates the Increase in the Chocolate Ration", Alexander Terekhov, 2007/04/26