Results 1 to 10 of 101

Thread: SteamOS Didn't Use Ubuntu Over Legal Issues

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2011


    Quote Originally Posted by JX8p View Post
    When canonical talks binaries, one assumes they mean DPKGs. I cannot say if it is legal to restrict their use or not. That they are containers for GPL software may or may not be relevant.

    Furthermore Vim is 100% right with regards to restricting repositories. Those are THEIR servers. They can restrict them all they want. An analogy: if you kept a stock of CDs with GPL software on them in a shed and let people come and go as they please to take a CD, but only if they agreed to stay for a cup of tea too, would that be GPL violation? No. To suggest so is patently absurd.
    As to the tea example ...

    That would not be a violation because the obligation is created before the fact. I've accepted the promise to conduct a transaction in the near future and given you a copy of software in consideration of that promise.
    If I also require you to distribute copies to your friends only if the promise to come buy tea from me, that is a GPL violation, meaning that my distribution is not authorized by the GPL and the distribution itself would be a copyright violation on my part and the contract would be void. Furthermore if I knew or was reckless in not knowing this and accepted your consideration anyways, then I would have just committed a fraud against you.
    Last edited by WorBlux; 01-09-2014 at 02:18 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts