GPL vs BSD Licence
tedm at toybox.placo.com
Wed Oct 27 01:49:32 PDT 2004
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-freebsd-questions at freebsd.org
> [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions at freebsd.org]On Behalf Of TM4525 at aol.com
> Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 10:45 AM
> To: tedm at toybox.placo.com
> Cc: questions at freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: GPL vs BSD Licence
> In a message dated 10/26/04 2:32:58 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> tedm at toybox.placo.com writes:
> Actually a more interesting example is some of the Linksys routers
> do indeed use an embedded Linux along with Zebra as the routing engine.
> Or Allot communications, who openly advertise the use of linux, but do
> not make source available to an obviously modified kernel.. I
> believe they
> claim that the GPL is optional.
Heh - didn't know about that one. Why doesen't someone ask Linus when
he's going to sue over copyright infringement, next time he spouts
about the GPL.
This is yet another example of the GPL license flaw. While any of the
copyright holders of the Linux kernel could sue Allot, if they don't,
it pretty much builds evidence that is going to help those that
would argue that the GPL is uninforceable.
There's been a couple of other GPL cases like this - of infringement
that is being ignored. One of these days I'm going to have to gather
up all these and write an article on it.
More information about the freebsd-questions