

SFLC: Microsoft violated the GPL - dp619
http://www.sdtimes.com/link/33641

======
VonGuard
Meh, when has the SFLC ever been helpful, rather than a bully. Bully for the
good guys, yeah, but they're still lawyers/bullies.

------
blasdel
...and the SFLC putting out press releases like this when Microsoft was trying
to do the right thing is not helping.

~~~
socratees
Microsoft used GPLd code which it shouldn't have used in the first place.
That's the reason why they released the code for some linux drivers. They did
a mistake, but corrected it anyways.

~~~
blasdel
It's a stretch to say they _used_ GPLed code.

They wrote a kernel module that is unavoidably tightly coupled to the Linux
kernel, which means that it must be GPLv2 as a derived work. They appear to
have intended to release it as GPLv2, it just took a while.

The GPL does not require them to release the code on the internet publicly,
just to release it under the GPLv2 to people who have received the code in
some form (binaries) when they ask for it. Someone asked for it, and they
provided it. They were decent about it.

The only real 'violation' is that they didn't initially release the binary
with GPLv2 license text. I forgive them.

