4 ms·

> ...the users of the GPLed binaries have not had their right to see the source satisfied. That's the intent of the GPL (GPL v3 Preamble) but it's not an outco

> ...the users of the GPLed binaries have not had their right to see the source satisfied. That's the intent of the GPL (GPL v3 Preamble) but it's not an outcome that a license can guarantee. A copyright license can only be enforced using copyright law, and the remedies for copyright infringement are limited to monetary damages (actual or statutory). Sometimes the threat of a copyright infringement suit may compel an infringer to release their source code rather than be ordered to pay damages, but sometimes not.

phonebanshee 5y ago
That sounds like a very American thing to say. You're talking about Italian law here?
heavyset_go 5y ago
I'm not a lawyer, but how do software licenses differ from contracts and their stipulations? I'm under the impression that stipulations in legal contracts can be enforced by courts.
- slavik81 5y ago
  I'm not a lawyer either, but I believe you are referring to specific performance [1], which is rarely required (at least in common law systems). [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_performance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_performance
- btilly 5y ago
  I'm not a lawyer, but I happen to know the answer to this under common law. Which is what applies to most of the USA (Louisiana being the exception), but doesn't apply to Italy. I have no idea about Italian law. A common law contract requires an offer, acceptance, and consideration. That is, one side must offer the contract. The other must accept it. And each must have some potential gain from it (consideration). Both sides are then bound by the agreement. The agreement can be quite complicated, for example it may bind the parties to resolving disputes with binding arbitration. A license is permission to do something under some conditions. If you break the license, you are without permission. The licensor can then pursue claims against you just as they could if no license ever existed. For example if you break a copyright license, the licensor can sue you for copyright infringement. But without an explicit agreement from you, they can't sue for anything else.
  - GoblinSlayer 5y ago
    That's just how proprietary licenses prefer to work. Licenses can do anything contracts can do. Copyleft licenses can grant rights to your users, and if the court believes the rights were granted, it can enforce them.
    - btilly 5y ago
      Not according to lawyers that I've had long conversations about this with. This is just how the law works. If you want to find a discussion of this topic by a lawyer, a good chunk of https://rosenlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/Taxonomy-of-Licenses.pdf https://rosenlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/Taxonomy-of-Licenses... is on exactly this topic. The author of which specializes in open source licensing, and was the general counsel for the Open Software Institute.
      - GoblinSlayer 5y ago
        You mean bare licenses? The author mentions many times there are other possibilities.
        bdowling 5y ago
        The article that btilly linked to is very good, but I think it over-emphasizes the possibility of interpreting open source licenses as contracts. You have to read pretty far and pay close attention to understand that most open source licenses will fail as contracts and that the GPL explicitly intends that result (pp. 65-66). Some consequences: (1) the sole recourse for breach of license conditions will be to sue for copyright infringement, (2) only the copyright owner will have standing to sue, (i.e., an intermediate licensee or a user, who might have standing as a third-party beneficiary under a contract theory, will not), and (3) remedies will be limited to monetary damages.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
nextaccountic 5y ago
I can't elaborate more than that, but I was under the impression that in some places software licenses can be enforced with contract law, and in other places with copyright law.

phonebanshee 5y ago

That sounds like a very American thing to say. You're talking about Italian law here?

heavyset_go 5y ago

I'm not a lawyer, but how do software licenses differ from contracts and their stipulations? I'm under the impression that stipulations in legal contracts can be enforced by courts.

slavik81 5y ago
I'm not a lawyer either, but I believe you are referring to specific performance [1], which is rarely required (at least in common law systems). [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_performance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_performance
btilly 5y ago
I'm not a lawyer, but I happen to know the answer to this under common law. Which is what applies to most of the USA (Louisiana being the exception), but doesn't apply to Italy. I have no idea about Italian law. A common law contract requires an offer, acceptance, and consideration. That is, one side must offer the contract. The other must accept it. And each must have some potential gain from it (consideration). Both sides are then bound by the agreement. The agreement can be quite complicated, for example it may bind the parties to resolving disputes with binding arbitration. A license is permission to do something under some conditions. If you break the license, you are without permission. The licensor can then pursue claims against you just as they could if no license ever existed. For example if you break a copyright license, the licensor can sue you for copyright infringement. But without an explicit agreement from you, they can't sue for anything else.
- GoblinSlayer 5y ago
  That's just how proprietary licenses prefer to work. Licenses can do anything contracts can do. Copyleft licenses can grant rights to your users, and if the court believes the rights were granted, it can enforce them.
  - btilly 5y ago
    Not according to lawyers that I've had long conversations about this with. This is just how the law works. If you want to find a discussion of this topic by a lawyer, a good chunk of https://rosenlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/Taxonomy-of-Licenses.pdf https://rosenlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/Taxonomy-of-Licenses... is on exactly this topic. The author of which specializes in open source licensing, and was the general counsel for the Open Software Institute.
    - GoblinSlayer 5y ago
      You mean bare licenses? The author mentions many times there are other possibilities.
      - bdowling 5y ago
        The article that btilly linked to is very good, but I think it over-emphasizes the possibility of interpreting open source licenses as contracts. You have to read pretty far and pay close attention to understand that most open source licenses will fail as contracts and that the GPL explicitly intends that result (pp. 65-66). Some consequences: (1) the sole recourse for breach of license conditions will be to sue for copyright infringement, (2) only the copyright owner will have standing to sue, (i.e., an intermediate licensee or a user, who might have standing as a third-party beneficiary under a contract theory, will not), and (3) remedies will be limited to monetary damages.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

nextaccountic 5y ago

I can't elaborate more than that, but I was under the impression that in some places software licenses can be enforced with contract law, and in other places with copyright law.