4 ms·

I would think that the most likely thing to happen is that no-one would ever know that GPL'd code was used. This is one feature of binary releases: copyright i

by artsrc 17y ago

I would think that the most likely thing to happen is that no-one would ever know that GPL'd code was used. This is one feature of binary releases: copyright infringement is easy, widespread, and largely undetectable. I don't know of large damages being awarded for violations of the GPL. Is there must history of this? I would have thought Microsoft could write a replacement in house while their lawyers stall, then they would pay a fine quite small compared to their issues with proprietary IP, such as double space.

Maxious 17y ago
The D-Link case on gpl-violations.org fetched ~2,870 euro. Small change perhaps, but if a larger damages could be found on the scale of Microsoft it wouldn't be insignificant. And as we see from the ffmpeg hall of shame, binary releases of wrongly-distributed GPL'd code often leave telltale strings in the binary. If you'd go to enough effort to obsfucate the binary effectively (not just strings) for every possible source file, why not just write it yourself?