Re: Re: GPL/LGPL

"Brian F. G. Bidulock" <[email protected]> Tue, 5 Dec 2006 15:28:23 -0700
Newsgroups gmane.linux.kernel.streams
Organization http://www.openss7.org/
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Steve,

IANAL, but in that case, it appears the plantiff got precisely
what they asked of the German court.

Running under a dual-licensed model, I could ask for punitive
damages from lost royalties as well.  (Also described at
http://www.gpl-violations.org/ -- the applicant in the Fortinet
action.)
=09
Perhaps we will get a chance yet to test your legal theories
in Ontario court.

--brian

On Tue, 05 Dec 2006, Steve Schefter wrote:
>
> For example, in the Fortinet case, the court imposed an injunction
> "banning them from further distribution of their products until
> they are in compliance with the GNU GPL conditions".  Fortinet
> today distributes products using GPL code.  The difference is
> that they started including a copy of the licence and making
> source available.
>=20

--=20
Brian F. G. Bidulock    =A6 The reasonable man adapts himself to the =A6
[email protected]    =A6 world; the unreasonable one persists in  =A6
http://www.openss7.org/ =A6 trying  to adapt the  world  to himself. =A6
                        =A6 Therefore  all  progress  depends on the =A6
                        =A6 unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw =A6