Personal tools

60 day violation window

From GPLv3 Wiki

(Difference between revisions)
Revision as of 19:36, 4 July 2006
julli9 (Talk | contribs)

← Previous diff
Current revision
hstech (Talk | contribs)

Line 1: Line 1:
-<div id="nolabel" style="overflow:auto;height:1px;">+A malicious manufactorer makes a router that runs Linux. They build the device, and distribute it to stores without the source code, thus violating the GPL. The stores agree to hold it for 60 days, and then put it on store shelves.
 +The manufacturer claims that they were going to distribute the source code with the product. However since they failed to do this 60 days ago, they are now immune as per the termination section. Therefore they do not have to distribute the source.
-[http://www.action-meds.com cheap butalbital]+The stores might be in violation, since they can't distribute the source with the product. Since they do not have the source, perhaps this falls under the "Liberty or Death?" section, and they can't sell it at all? If that's the case, the manufactorer can't sell it so they have no incentive to set up this scheme, so maybe it doesn't matter. Or perhaps it falls under First Sale doctrine: stores don't accept the license, since they never use the software.
-[http://www.5stardrugs.com buy tramadol]+
-[http://www.24-7pills.net tramadol online]+
-[http://www.american-meds.net butalbital discount]+
-[http://www.amazing-pills.com butalbital cheap] +
-buy tramadol online. online tramadol from our pharmacy, taking tramadol buy information tramadol, side effects tramadol, purchase tramadol online. cod online tramadol, tramadol india, cheap tramadol online, tramadol online, pharmacy online store +
-tramadol 50 mg. low price tramadol, tramadol pain treatment - tramadol hcl 50? - 120 tramadol. tramadol sales, buying cod tramado l, tramadol for humans, cheap tramadol online, overdose tramadol. order tramadol pictured tramadol pill tramadol seizure. cod tramadol cod, tramadol pdr, order pharmacy tramadol. buy prescription tramadol drug tramadol - tramadol side. +
-is tramadol a, order tramadol online, tramadol hcl, tramadol drug test .tramadol uses order tramadol overnight paypal tramadol +
-tramadol com tramadol tablets tramadol no perscription remove tramadol.+
-[http://20six.co.uk/cheaptramadol cheap tramadol]+
-[http://20six.co.uk/ordertramadol order tramadol]+
-[http://20six.co.uk/onlinetramadol1 online tramadol]+
-[http://20six.co.uk/tramadolonline tramadol online]+
-[http://20six.co.uk/tramadoldiscount tramadol discount]+
-[http://20six.co.uk/purchasetramadol purchase tramadol]+
-[http://20six.co.uk/ordersoma order soma]+
-[http://20six.co.uk/onlinesoma1 online soma]+
-[http://20six.co.uk/online-viagra online viagea]+
-[http://20six.co.uk/orderviagra order viagra]+
-[http://20six.co.uk/cheapviagraonline cheap viagra online]+
-[http://20six.co.uk/purchaseviagra purchase viagra]+
-[http://20six.co.uk/cheap-ultram cheap ultram]+
-[http://spaces.msn.com/cheap-tramadol/ cheap tramadol]+:I don't think that terminating the rights under the license makes them immune from legal action(disclaimer: the author of this text is not a lawyer, and is not giving legal advice). It is a license not a contract, so if the license is terminated, that does not retrospectively make any distribution legal.
-[http://spaces.msn.com/buy-viagra/ buy viagra]+
-SEO: UndoneHeaven+:The "violation window" is something different than this scenario shows. This is how it works: The manufacturer violates the GPL. When the copyright holder notices this, he notifies the manufacturer. Then the manufacturer has 60 days (this is the "violation window") to either comply with the GPL or cease to use the software. If the manufacturer fails to do so after these 60 days, his license is terminated and if the manufacturer tries to ignore this license termination and use the software anyway, the copyright holder can sue him for copyright infringement. The 60 days in the agreement between the stores and the manufacturer are NOT the "violation window" at all. And finally when the stores are sued by the copyright holder, they can 1) tell the copyright holder to sue the manufacturer instead for an illegal distribution and/or 2) after they lose an lawsuit with the copyright holder, sue the manufacturer for fraud and demand the copyright holder lawsuit expenses as damages. (I personally think in vast majority of the cases 1) will work fine as free software developers usually seek GPL compliance, not lawsuits) [[User:hstech|hstech]] 05:20, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
- +
-[http://www.replicahours.com rolex replica]+
-[http://www.replicahours.com/index.php?cPath=51_25 fake rolex daydate]+
-[http://www.replicahours.com/index.php?cPath=29 replica swiss]+
-[http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&gfns=1&ie=UTF-8&q=replicahours replicahours]+
-buy replica cheap best price rolex discounf fake. watches fake watch online store using paypal fedex rolex replicahours. order rolex replica now. cheap wholesale fake rolex online free shipping. 80% discount rolex replica and replicas watches. woman how to adjust a chronometer watch authorized rolex dealer, rolex watches rolex dial rolex oyster perpetual date reloj panerai replica en usa rolex watches serial numbers rolex woman daytona daytona watch replica panerai watch rolex 50th anniversary rolex daytona paul newman replica rolex buy rolex watches. ladies rolex yachtmaster white dial faux. rolex daytona manual cellini rolex for sale pictures of rolex oyster perpetual datejust rolex rolex gmt-master ii buying rolex on line fake rolex daytona gold on silver how to tell fake tag rolex oyster perpetual new tell. Replica rolex? Swiss made replica rolex watch! Cost does fake much rolex rolex presidential rolex. Rolex dials rolex sea dweller. Rolex tudor fake rolex turkey datejust oyster perpetual rolex man rolex submariner cosmograph daytona oyster professional rolex? Datejust rolex rolex replica rolex fake rolexes for sale. Rolex submariner for sale, rolex yachtmaster! Explorer ii rolex preowned rolex watch? Cheap rolex watch, rolex daytona 116520 forum rolex. 18k gold replica ex part rolex daytona review rolex submariner 50 anniversary rolex cellini replica rolex watch fake rolex omega?+
- +
-[http://www.customsoftwarenow.com custom software development]+
-Software Development, custom software development, offshore software development, outsourcing software development+
- +
-[http://www.thepublish.com press release]+
-press release, articles, business directory, ezines, classifieds, job search,business free b2b search advertising aerospace defense agriculture airlines automotive chemicals computers electronics semiconductors energy utilities +
- +
-[http://www.ez-agents.com wholesale atv]+
-</div>+

Current revision

A malicious manufactorer makes a router that runs Linux. They build the device, and distribute it to stores without the source code, thus violating the GPL. The stores agree to hold it for 60 days, and then put it on store shelves.

The manufacturer claims that they were going to distribute the source code with the product. However since they failed to do this 60 days ago, they are now immune as per the termination section. Therefore they do not have to distribute the source.

The stores might be in violation, since they can't distribute the source with the product. Since they do not have the source, perhaps this falls under the "Liberty or Death?" section, and they can't sell it at all? If that's the case, the manufactorer can't sell it so they have no incentive to set up this scheme, so maybe it doesn't matter. Or perhaps it falls under First Sale doctrine: stores don't accept the license, since they never use the software.

I don't think that terminating the rights under the license makes them immune from legal action(disclaimer: the author of this text is not a lawyer, and is not giving legal advice). It is a license not a contract, so if the license is terminated, that does not retrospectively make any distribution legal.
The "violation window" is something different than this scenario shows. This is how it works: The manufacturer violates the GPL. When the copyright holder notices this, he notifies the manufacturer. Then the manufacturer has 60 days (this is the "violation window") to either comply with the GPL or cease to use the software. If the manufacturer fails to do so after these 60 days, his license is terminated and if the manufacturer tries to ignore this license termination and use the software anyway, the copyright holder can sue him for copyright infringement. The 60 days in the agreement between the stores and the manufacturer are NOT the "violation window" at all. And finally when the stores are sued by the copyright holder, they can 1) tell the copyright holder to sue the manufacturer instead for an illegal distribution and/or 2) after they lose an lawsuit with the copyright holder, sue the manufacturer for fraud and demand the copyright holder lawsuit expenses as damages. (I personally think in vast majority of the cases 1) will work fine as free software developers usually seek GPL compliance, not lawsuits) hstech 05:20, 19 March 2007 (EDT)