Github ToS and Open Source

[Xen]

Paul Smith schreef op 03-03-2017 19:32:

> We'd better hope that's not the case, because if it is then almost the
> entire internet / computing industry is constructed from illegal
> copyright infringement.

I mean that the restrictive terms are probably not enforceable. So what 
I mean is that although the "free use" cannot be contracted (or 
contradicted) "non-free" use can possibly not be punished.

I mean that there is a chance that GPL will be read as:

- you cannot sue those who use your own code according to the GPL (you 
are protected for such use)

- you cannot force others to redistribute your code after you have made 
it available to them with the intent of it being used.

So what you mean is infringement which would be the first part.

What I meant was the "applies to all derivative works" nature in that it 
is a _strong_ copyleft license, ie. you cannot enforce that every 
software using any part of GPL'd code must also be GPL.

But until it is put the to test there is no legal precedent that clearly 
denotes what's what here.

In any case I believe Colin just meant to give attention to the issue so 
let's stop here.


> Unfortunately it's not something those that are basing their business
> model and personal livelihoods on FOSS-licensed code are able to ignore
> so blithely: they _have_ to deal with it, and we should let them do it
> without scoffing, IMO.

Of course, but corporate businesses (that use proprietary code) also 
have to deal with it, and in the negative way in this sense: they avoid 
it.

But I do not oppose businesses depending on the freedom of GPL and their 
right to use the GPL code for their products being defended in law 
against lawsuits for their use of the code.

Of course GPL is a message from the author to the user that says: go 
ahead and use it, and that should not be retracted at a later date.