Re:WTFPL
by TallGuyShort on Monday March 01, 2010 @05:17PM
(#1159953)
If I'm not mistaken, the GPL has had to be defended in court several times. It's a situation where someone tries to charge money for a product, but a GPL'd source code was used in the product. That particular situation doesn't apply to this license however, since you can, apparently, do whatever you want.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
The GPL has nothing to do with "charging money", so no, that's never been tested in court. And in any case, in a suit regarding any distribution license, it is the copyright owner who would bring the suit, forcing the alleged infringer to "defend" the case.
Re:WTFPL
by TallGuyShort on Tuesday March 02, 2010 @09:14AM
(#1161380)
Sorry - I was indeed mistaken about the "charging money" aspect of it. However, the GPL has been successfully defended in court:
http://gpl-violations.org/news/20060922-dlink-judgement_fran...