Web lists-archives.com

Re: Can a recipients rights under GNU GPL be revoked?




On Sunday, January 27, 2019 07:24:17 PM rhkramer@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Resending to the list -- I didn't notice that Ivan had sent this to me
> only, and my reply, of course, then went to him only.
> 
> On Sunday, January 27, 2019 10:06:46 AM Ivan Ivanov wrote:
> > Yes: The linux devs can rescind their license grant. GPLv2 is a bare
> > license and is revocable by the grantor. Search for "vsnsdualce" "gpl"
> > online to find his messages which prove that, he is a lawyer and has
> > investigated this subject very well. I am CC'ing him in case you'd
> > like to request more information. So if you didn't like the Code of
> > Conduct covertly accepted behind the scenes against your will, and
> > maybe some other questionable political decisions in technical
> > projects

...
 
> I *might* go read some of the stuff by vsnsdualce, but the Weboob situation
> is not an example of a (free or GPL) license being rescinded.  (You didn't
> quite say it was, but one could infer that is what you are trying to say
> by its inclusion in the same paragraph.)

Ok, I went and read a few things by "vsnsdualce" re the GPL, in particular:

http://readlist.com/lists/gentoo.org/gentoo-user/42/213256.html

And from that, I went to:

https://copyleft.org/guide/comprehensive-gpl-guidech8.html#x11-540007.4

It seems clear that this is one of those things that I talked about in my 
previous last paragraph (the aside, still quoted below) -- vsnsdualce is 
stating his opinion / taking a position that is in opposition to the postions 
/ opinions of other lawyers.

I don't know how far he is willing to go to try to confirm his position, but 
until a court case or something similar (and probably appeals) decides the 
issue, there are two opinions.

If I had to guess / be which would prevail, I would bet on the side of 
copyleft.org who, in a way are the successors (mcow) to the original author(s) 
of the GPL.  (And Bradley Kuhn is a lawyer -- my older mind can't remember if 
he was the lawyer who argued (and lost) a previous free software case (don't 
remember the details) in front of the US Supreme Court.  (Sometimes referred 
to as "the supremes", but they don't really sing that well (well, to be fair, 
I guess I never heard them sing ;-)

Even if he was the guy that lost that case (I'm fairly sure it was someone 
else), he is certainly a very experienced lawyer, and very familiar with the 
issues around this license.  I would trust his opinion more that I would 
"vsnsdualce"'s.

...

> 
> Just another aside: One of my takes on lawyers is that they interpret laws
> and take legal positions for various reasons, often to further their own
> or their client's interests, and then are willing to fight the legal
> battle that may ensue.  A lawyer expressing an opinion does not make that
> opinion correct / legal.