7 ms·

If you violate the license that allows you to use some code, and the license says that any violation terminates the license, then you are technically stealing t

by Drakim 4y ago

If you violate the license that allows you to use some code, and the license says that any violation terminates the license, then you are technically stealing the code by using it (basic copyright infringement). So you could be sued for that, in the same way you could be sued for using any code you aren't allowed to use. There would be damages awarded in fines, and maybe even prison time in theory. As an extreme example, if I wrote a software license that makes you my lifelong slave for using my software, and you use it without becoming my slave, then no judge is going to enforce slavery upon you. But they might fine you for stealing my software.

MrGilbert 4y ago
> But they might fine you for stealing my software. I don't think it's that easy. ;)
hgomersall 4y ago
No, you are not technically stealing; you are technically infringing copyright. I appreciate you put that in brackets, but it still isn't stealing (technically or otherwise).
- Drakim 4y ago
  You are totally right, I was trying to ELI5 my language but ended up taking it too far.
JanisErdmanis 4y ago
In “Intelectual property and open source” an alternative interpretation of GPL is given as a contract due to way it is written. So the code company is shipping along with GPL can be looked as violation if I understood that correctly. This is the stick which makes Qt business model with LGPL to work.
quickthrower2 4y ago
IANAL but i suspect the slave thing would be void but otherwise the license would still stand. Otherwise people could bury ridiculous clauses in licenses to trick people into not really having a license.
andreareina 4y ago
The difference is that I don't think you're able to sell yourself into slavery so that contract is void.
afiori 4y ago
The judge would not order to release the code, but John Deere could likely avoid paying (most of) the fine it they instead decided to release the source code.
- squarefoot 4y ago
  Which wouldn't help much if they keep their hardware encrypted and locked, de facto preventing users from checking that the hardware actually runs the released code, therefore giving no guarantees against planned obsolescence and other tricks.
  - the_pwner224 4y ago
    That's not the purpose of the GPLv2. If JD published their source code they would fulfill all the obligations of the license. Doesn't matter if their hardware is locked down.
    - pabs3 4y ago
      That is a misconception, the GPLv2 also provides users the right to modify, rebuild and reinstall software on their devices. https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/mar/25/install-gplv2/ https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/mar/25/install-gplv2/ https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/jul/23/tivoization-and-the-gpl-right-to-install/ https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/jul/23/tivoization-and-t... However, with both GPLv2 and GPLv3, a vendor of an aggregation of copyleft and proprietary software can legally cause the the proprietary software to stop working when the copyleft software is modified. I think this hasn't been tested in court though, but the license as they are written both allow this. This would essentially brick your car/tractor until you rewrote that proprietary software from scratch. https://events19.linuxfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Safely-Copylefted-Cars-Reexamining-GPLv3-Installation-Information-Requirements-ALS-Bradley-Kuhn-Behan-Webster-1.pdf https://events19.linuxfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017...

by Drakim 4y ago

MrGilbert 4y ago

> But they might fine you for stealing my software. I don't think it's that easy. ;)

hgomersall 4y ago

No, you are not technically stealing; you are technically infringing copyright. I appreciate you put that in brackets, but it still isn't stealing (technically or otherwise).

Drakim 4y ago
You are totally right, I was trying to ELI5 my language but ended up taking it too far.

JanisErdmanis 4y ago

In “Intelectual property and open source” an alternative interpretation of GPL is given as a contract due to way it is written. So the code company is shipping along with GPL can be looked as violation if I understood that correctly. This is the stick which makes Qt business model with LGPL to work.

quickthrower2 4y ago

IANAL but i suspect the slave thing would be void but otherwise the license would still stand. Otherwise people could bury ridiculous clauses in licenses to trick people into not really having a license.

andreareina 4y ago

The difference is that I don't think you're able to sell yourself into slavery so that contract is void.

afiori 4y ago

The judge would not order to release the code, but John Deere could likely avoid paying (most of) the fine it they instead decided to release the source code.

squarefoot 4y ago
Which wouldn't help much if they keep their hardware encrypted and locked, de facto preventing users from checking that the hardware actually runs the released code, therefore giving no guarantees against planned obsolescence and other tricks.
- the_pwner224 4y ago
  That's not the purpose of the GPLv2. If JD published their source code they would fulfill all the obligations of the license. Doesn't matter if their hardware is locked down.
  - pabs3 4y ago
    That is a misconception, the GPLv2 also provides users the right to modify, rebuild and reinstall software on their devices. https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/mar/25/install-gplv2/ https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/mar/25/install-gplv2/ https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/jul/23/tivoization-and-the-gpl-right-to-install/ https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2021/jul/23/tivoization-and-t... However, with both GPLv2 and GPLv3, a vendor of an aggregation of copyleft and proprietary software can legally cause the the proprietary software to stop working when the copyleft software is modified. I think this hasn't been tested in court though, but the license as they are written both allow this. This would essentially brick your car/tractor until you rewrote that proprietary software from scratch. https://events19.linuxfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Safely-Copylefted-Cars-Reexamining-GPLv3-Installation-Information-Requirements-ALS-Bradley-Kuhn-Behan-Webster-1.pdf https://events19.linuxfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017...