
GPL, ScummVM and violations - CrazedGeek
http://sev-notes.blogspot.com/2009/06/gpl-scummvm-and-violations.html
======
jerf
Any particular reason this is coming up now? Has there been a change in the
situation since June 2009? Honest question; I'm not saying this isn't
interesting, I'm just curious if there's any particular reason to bring it up
again today.

~~~
CrazedGeek
Not really, no. The VLC in App Store thing a few days ago reminded me of it is
all.

------
j_baker
Why on earth would Nintendo ban open source software on the Wii?

~~~
jwatzman
My suspicion is that GPL'd software linked against the official Nintendo SDK
could require release of parts of that SDK, which Nintendo wants to keep
_tight_ control over.

~~~
rue
I don't think any sane reading of the GPL would imply that it "taints" a host
platform (via its libraries), whereas the inverse, non-GPL code linking
against GPL libraries, certainly can be argued. Maybe that's something that
they don't want to go to court to prove though.

------
iwwr
Is it possible for anyone to start a GPL-infringement suit, or does everything
have to pass through the FSF?

~~~
narcissus
As far I understand it, if you are a copyright owner and your copyright is
being infringed, you can start the suit.

In fact, generally (at least) the FSF will only take up lawsuits when it
involves infringement against their own copyright. That is one reason why they
suggest that if you are writing GPL software, then you should assign copyright
to them.

~~~
rmc
For the record I don't think the FSF asks that all GPL software gets assigned
to them. However for all GNU software (bash, gcc etc) They want copyright
assignment.

~~~
narcissus
My bad. I knew that they didn't really ask for assignment to them for all GPL
software, but I was under the impression that at some point, at least, they
were suggesting something along the lines of "if you want our legal
representation then feel free to assign the copyright to us". Not in a mafia
'protection' way, either, but more of a logistics thing than anything.

Either way, that doesn't seem to be the case.

I can completely understand why they want copyright assignment with the GNU
software, though. Having everyone keep their copyright 'feels' nice, but how
many projects have we seen that end up almost frozen because they want to do
something with the license but can't find all of the copyright owners, let
alone get them to agree?

