2 ms·

A contract, license, or agreement are only "real" if both parties have the means to enforce them. Which means, you have to lawyer up and spend vast sums of mon

by Alupis 4y ago

A contract, license, or agreement are only "real" if both parties have the means to enforce them. Which means, you have to lawyer up and spend vast sums of money to go after people violating your license (GPL here). Which is why you routinely hear about people violating the GPL - the interested parties have no means to enforce their license, and the counter party likely has deep pockets; deep enough to out last, out spend, and bury the licenser.

nroets 4y ago
What if the license says "licencee will provide source code (GPL) or pay $n per device" ? If the lawyers then demand the source code and they don't comply then sue for n x number of devices.
- Alupis 4y ago
  The reality of the legal system is, it often does not matter who is most righteous, but rather who has more money and more lawyers. There are no provisions of any contract or agreement that matter if you are not prepared to enforce them, no matter the cost. So, while you can insert a clause like you have described above, but you are still in the same position - drain your bank account paying lawyers to maybe recover some damages after probably many months or years of posturing and litigation. The calculus on that effort often means it's not financially sound, or worth trying to enforce the contract. Just to see the inside of a court room, you will already be in the hole for at least six figures. If the other side manages to drag things out for years, the costs increase dramatically. So it becomes - pay $xxx,xxx to litigate and take a chance that maybe if you win, you might recover some of that money... maybe. This is why, again, so many GPL violations exist today. The FOSS projects lack the means to enforce the license. This is also why organizations like the FSF exist - to help FOSS projects (and others) negotiate and litigate these costly-and-usually-not-profitable conflicts.

by Alupis 4y ago

nroets 4y ago

What if the license says "licencee will provide source code (GPL) or pay $n per device" ? If the lawyers then demand the source code and they don't comply then sue for n x number of devices.

Alupis 4y ago
The reality of the legal system is, it often does not matter who is most righteous, but rather who has more money and more lawyers. There are no provisions of any contract or agreement that matter if you are not prepared to enforce them, no matter the cost. So, while you can insert a clause like you have described above, but you are still in the same position - drain your bank account paying lawyers to maybe recover some damages after probably many months or years of posturing and litigation. The calculus on that effort often means it's not financially sound, or worth trying to enforce the contract. Just to see the inside of a court room, you will already be in the hole for at least six figures. If the other side manages to drag things out for years, the costs increase dramatically. So it becomes - pay $xxx,xxx to litigate and take a chance that maybe if you win, you might recover some of that money... maybe. This is why, again, so many GPL violations exist today. The FOSS projects lack the means to enforce the license. This is also why organizations like the FSF exist - to help FOSS projects (and others) negotiate and litigate these costly-and-usually-not-profitable conflicts.