Posted on 09/27/2018 3:21:55 AM PDT by Openurmind
7.4.1 The text of the GPLv2
The GPLv2 have several provisions that, when taken together, can be construed as an irrevocable license from each contributor. First, the GPLv2 says “by modifying or distributing the Program (or any work based on the Program), you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so, and all its terms and conditions for copying, distributing or modifying the Program or works based on it” (GPLv2§5, emphasis added). A contributor by definition is modifying the code and therefore has agreed to all the terms in the GPLv2, which includes the web of mechanisms in the GPLv2 that ensure the code can be used by all.
More specifically, the downstream license grant says “the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to these terms and conditions.” (GPLv2§6). So in this step, the contributor has granted a license to the downstream, on the condition that the downstream complies with the license terms.
That license granted to downstream is irrevocable, again provided that the downstream user complies with the license terms: “[P]arties who have received copies, or rights, from you under this License will not have their licenses terminated so long as such parties remain in full compliance” (GPLv2§4).
Thus, anyone downstream of the contributor (which is anyone using the contributor’s code), has an irrevocable license from the contributor. A contributor may claim to revoke their grant, and subsequently sue for copyright infringement, but a court would likely find the revocation was ineffective and the downstream user had a valid license defense to a claim of infringement.
Nevertheless, for purposes of argument, we will assume that for some reason the GPLv2 is not enforceable against the contributor5, or that the irrevocable license can be revoked6. In that case, the application of promissory estoppel will likely mean that the contributor still cannot enforce their copyright against downstream users.
How lawyers get rich...
The response from the core programmers was we'll invoke the GPL v2 terms that permit us to revoke the licenses to use the core libraries if they're banned.
Honestly, I think virtually every downstream distributor has violated some part of GPL at some point and likely would be the better strategy to exploit against the purging threats (and actions in some cases.)
Lawyers are going to get rich, yep.
So the commies want to kill the free software and only use the capitalist software?
Bookmark
BSD license rocks, baby!
>> SJW’s have started targeting those who created the core of Linux ...
Any recent examples that are easy to cite?
The Lefties who run Linux development have decided to kick out non-Lefties and remove their names from the list of code contributors but keep using their code.
The only payment developers get is recognition.
Taking away that recognition after the fact is theft.
ZDNet is owned by CBS, so take that into consideration...
https://www.zdnet.com/article/linus-torvalds-and-linux-code-of-conduct-myths/
And to prevent this they added the new terms in the license. They clarified the pre-existing terms that when you submit software under the license you have already agreed that it is irrevocable to the downstream users save the very few restrictions.
Too bad... Too late... You can choose to not contribute if you like, but what you already put out there or put out there from now on cannot be revoked without very limited specific violations by the next user.
Can’t just be revoked retroactively on a whim like they were talking about doing.
Just wanted to catch up... Thank you for your reply! I don’t know if you know about this. But the true scope of this is absolutely huge. It would have shut down the Internet altogether.
Almost ALL websites and webservers including this one are based on Linux Apache software...
This would have been absolutely devastating if allowed to happen... :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.