4 ms·

This leads me to a legal question about GPL stuff.. Say the guys at KDE threw their full legal might behind this- what would happen to Sony? Obviously they wou

by polshaw 14y ago

This leads me to a legal question about GPL stuff.. Say the guys at KDE threw their full legal might behind this- what would happen to Sony? Obviously they would be required to change it (or include the GPL licence), but is that all? What kind of 'damages' could be claimed in such a situation?.. ie what is the risk to Sony in doing this. NB i'm using this (somewhat trivial) example to talk about GPL violation more broadly.

freehunter 14y ago
Well, it is still copyright infringement. It doesn't matter if the copyright says you can do whatever you want as long as you mention our license, if you don't follow the terms you're still infringing on their copyright.
- manaskarekar 14y ago
  I think he's asking about stuff like 'What kind of damages can KDE claim due to "lost sales", since it's not software that is usually sold.'
  - belorn 14y ago
    Lost sales is normally calculated as some hypothetical price tag in the case if Sony had bought a license from KDE. Its what music labels do when calculating damages in p2p cases, rather than looking at the unit cost.
- mdda 14y ago
  Isn't the standard metric $150,000 per infringement? AFAIR, that's the statutory rate they apply for MP3 pirating.
belorn 14y ago
Depend on the judge and jury. It could come down to damges per sold unit if Sony is seen as intentional breaking copyright law, especially from this point on after Sony has become aware of the issue. In more likeness, KDE can now prevent any future sale of VAIO if they want, but asking a judge for an injunction. Of course, this assume that the copyright law is sanely being interpreted. If we use movie/music version of it, KDE can then dictate what a "license agreement" would cost for sony if they were to "buy" the image. They could then say "If we were to buy a similar image from apple, they would require this cart loads of money so that's what Sony should pay + damages and lawyer costs.
- polshaw 14y ago
  Working with the assumption that Sony righted-itself in a reasonable time-frame after legal action/threats began; Could KDE prevent sales of VAIO machines if they were now complaint? I guess not? Is there ANY precedent for damages of this kind of situation? (particularly where wilful infringement was not long-continued) If not, it would seem there is an almost non-existent risk.
  - mpyne 14y ago
    If Sony took even the tiniest steps toward reasonable action to come in compliance I'd be 101% surprised if either the KDE e.V. or the artist tries to take any further legal action. And given that the license in this case merely requires attribution it would seem it's very easy to come into compliance. I don't know jriddell personally but I would be willing to bet his point is not the infringement, so much as the hypocrisy by the Big Giant Defender of IP, Sony.
    - polshaw 14y ago
      I understand this, but i was asking a broader question; is there any real deterrent or risk for a company to use GPL code (in violation) first, and then fix it if/when they get found out and threatened legal action. No one has brought up a case that got to the point of there being actual damages, which leads me to believe there isn't, really. The closest i (as by no means an expert) can think of in terms of commercial 'damage' is when Linksys released the source code for their routers found using linux. (And this release probably led to them making more money anyway).
      - mpyne 14y ago
        > is there any real deterrent or risk for a company to use GPL code (in violation) first, and then fix it if/when they get found out and threatened legal action. Well, there's a pretty wide gulf between "The Board of Directors and CEO decided that any legal consequences would be cheaper than not infringing" and "Oops, we didn't mean to mis-appropriate that IP". The tricky area IMO is when a company or industry repeatedly "Oops"es and you have to start wondering whether they're even performing due diligence.
smogzer 14y ago
Damages ? is easy just count the people in the hospital for this. A way to compensate is to link to the original artist page and maybe buy a license from him.
jacquesm 14y ago
Sony would have to either stop using the Icon or they would have to attribute it according to the license.

by polshaw 14y ago

freehunter 14y ago

Well, it is still copyright infringement. It doesn't matter if the copyright says you can do whatever you want as long as you mention our license, if you don't follow the terms you're still infringing on their copyright.

manaskarekar 14y ago
I think he's asking about stuff like 'What kind of damages can KDE claim due to "lost sales", since it's not software that is usually sold.'
- belorn 14y ago
  Lost sales is normally calculated as some hypothetical price tag in the case if Sony had bought a license from KDE. Its what music labels do when calculating damages in p2p cases, rather than looking at the unit cost.
mdda 14y ago
Isn't the standard metric $150,000 per infringement? AFAIR, that's the statutory rate they apply for MP3 pirating.

belorn 14y ago

Depend on the judge and jury. It could come down to damges per sold unit if Sony is seen as intentional breaking copyright law, especially from this point on after Sony has become aware of the issue. In more likeness, KDE can now prevent any future sale of VAIO if they want, but asking a judge for an injunction. Of course, this assume that the copyright law is sanely being interpreted. If we use movie/music version of it, KDE can then dictate what a "license agreement" would cost for sony if they were to "buy" the image. They could then say "If we were to buy a similar image from apple, they would require this cart loads of money so that's what Sony should pay + damages and lawyer costs.

polshaw 14y ago
Working with the assumption that Sony righted-itself in a reasonable time-frame after legal action/threats began; Could KDE prevent sales of VAIO machines if they were now complaint? I guess not? Is there ANY precedent for damages of this kind of situation? (particularly where wilful infringement was not long-continued) If not, it would seem there is an almost non-existent risk.
- mpyne 14y ago
  If Sony took even the tiniest steps toward reasonable action to come in compliance I'd be 101% surprised if either the KDE e.V. or the artist tries to take any further legal action. And given that the license in this case merely requires attribution it would seem it's very easy to come into compliance. I don't know jriddell personally but I would be willing to bet his point is not the infringement, so much as the hypocrisy by the Big Giant Defender of IP, Sony.
  - polshaw 14y ago
    I understand this, but i was asking a broader question; is there any real deterrent or risk for a company to use GPL code (in violation) first, and then fix it if/when they get found out and threatened legal action. No one has brought up a case that got to the point of there being actual damages, which leads me to believe there isn't, really. The closest i (as by no means an expert) can think of in terms of commercial 'damage' is when Linksys released the source code for their routers found using linux. (And this release probably led to them making more money anyway).
    - mpyne 14y ago
      > is there any real deterrent or risk for a company to use GPL code (in violation) first, and then fix it if/when they get found out and threatened legal action. Well, there's a pretty wide gulf between "The Board of Directors and CEO decided that any legal consequences would be cheaper than not infringing" and "Oops, we didn't mean to mis-appropriate that IP". The tricky area IMO is when a company or industry repeatedly "Oops"es and you have to start wondering whether they're even performing due diligence.

smogzer 14y ago

Damages ? is easy just count the people in the hospital for this. A way to compensate is to link to the original artist page and maybe buy a license from him.

jacquesm 14y ago

Sony would have to either stop using the Icon or they would have to attribute it according to the license.