[Info-vax] The real problem that needs solving to grow VMS

[Bill Gunshannon]

On 12/16/22 13:11, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2022-12-16, Bill Gunshannon <bill.gunshannon at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 12/15/22 20:23, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>
>>> If it went to court and GPL lost in lower court, then I predict that
>>> the GPL defenders could collect a billions dollars to help with the
>>> appeal in an hour just by calling all the big IT companies.
>>
>> Or the other possibility being that those billions of dollars would
>> be applied to arguing that because it was given away with a totally
>> bogus license it has actually been released into the public domain.
>>
> 
> That doesn't make any sense Bill.
> 
> The GPL is a permission to use software created by the author under
> a set of conditions imposed by that author.
> 
> If the GPL is found to be something that cannot be imposed, then the
> permission granted by the author is revoked, and hence nobody but the
> author can use the software until they release it under a new licence.
> 
> There is no possible path from "the GPL is invalid" to "the author no
> longer has any rights over the software they created" (which is what
> public domain means).

Actually, there is.  The last time I read any of that drivel they
were having people sign their IP over to the FSF.  So, if you are
right about what happens if the GPL fails in court, who ends out
owning the IP?  he author or the FSF?

I expect that it will never be decided in court as this is another of
those things where either side stands to loose too much to ever let it
go that far.  That's why people have successfully co-opted GPLed code
in the past without ever being dragged into court.

bill