I have not seen this video but it sounds like several things going about in Usenet and other mailgroup discusions.
The GPL is not really restrictive to the end user.
In fact it clearly states that it does not regulate end use.
Why is this?
It is becuase of CONTU. http://digital-law-online.info/CONTU/contu1.html and http://www.cni.org/docs/infopols/CONTU.html has the text of CONTU. IN 1978 CONTu released its report that was comissoned By Congress to explore the effects of having Softawre being copyrightable and even explored if Software should fall under Copyright or Patent. Read Chapter 3 http://digital-law-online.info/CONTU/contu9.html see in paticular table 1.
Anyhow the purpose of CONTU was to sheild end users from having to negotiate a seperate license from the copyright holders in order to use (Load, Install, and Run) their software. Congress adopted the CONTU recomondations with one change, they changed lawfull possesor to owner of software. When they did this it was to prevent mail couriers and other intermediaries from having rights to use the software. The validity of use licenses depends on which court you are in front of. Most notably the 8'th and 5'th district upholds them while most districts already have prescedent so they don't. Five states have passed ANTI-UCITA (UCITA Bomb shelter laws) so that a sale of softaware is a sale of goods under the UCC. One district even has a precedent that regardless of what the EULA says you have ownership rights to the copy of the software thus own it.
Anyhow under the GPL as a user you have no liability under copyright assuming you did due diligance to make sure it wasn't misapropraited. Even then the copyright holder must go after the distributor first - Why the SCO V Autozone case is on hold- SCO has to go after Red Hat first.
As a developer or distributor you do have liabilities and terms under the GPL that you do not under the BSD license. You must follow the Source Code and redistribution rights of the GPL or not distribute or create derivatives from it. Becuase of the redistribution clauses under the GPL there is no such thing as WAREZ GPL software. If someone wants to enter the market redistributing GPL software for 0 cost they can. Unser BSD you only have to notify that you incorperated softawre into your product.
Now Patents are a different story altogether. DMCA is also another ball of wax.
Discussion on:
Message 1 of 1
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
