Thread: GPL violation?
View Single Post
Old 02-29-2008, 02:53 PM   #38
DMcCunney
New York Editor
DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DMcCunney ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
DMcCunney's Avatar
 
Posts: 6,384
Karma: 16540415
Join Date: Aug 2007
Device: PalmTX, Pocket eDGe, Alcatel Fierce 4, RCA Viking Pro 10, Nexus 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by tompe View Post
I think they were aware of the problem. Signing a NDA for Linux code should have triggered a lot of questions. That was why I was surprised that they did not provide the OS themselves to get around these kind of problems.
The GPL is a "viral" license: code that links against GPL code becomes GPL in consequence.

But this only covers code that links against GPL code. Code that simply runs under Linux does not become GPL, and can be closed source and proprietary.

The question is exactly what was covered by the NDA Bookeen signed.

Quote:
And you are wrong. It is also Bookeen that is in violation. It is they that are sellling the unit.
Splendid. Now, find someone with money who feels strongly enough about this to hire a lawyer and take Bookeen to court. Good luck.
______
Dennis
DMcCunney is offline   Reply With Quote