Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
This is different, netfilter had presumable only a single copyright holder (or a few), Harald Welte. This isn't the case with the whole of Linux. For each infginged part, you would have to figure out who the copyright holder is, and ask them to sue.
Why each, and not any? Suing for any infringment should suffice, AFAICS. (Though, as I said, perhaps for lesser damages etc., so it's probably good to get as many and substantial contributors as possible, but I can't see why all would be required.)
If your position is true, then how about the following scenario (yes, I like to construct scenarios ;-):
- I take some important GPL GNU software project.
- I make some modifications to it (they don't even have to be substiantial or very useful).
- I release this modified work on my own (under the GPL which, of course, allows me to do that).
- If FSF asks me for a copyright assignment for my modifications, I politely refuse, as I don't care whether my modifications get included into the main project.
- E. Vil gets my distribution.
- E. Vil violates the GPL severly (making a propietary version, or whatever).
- FSF complains to E. Vil, who is unrelenting, so FSF wants to sue him.
- I don't want to sue, as I don't care much about the modifications I made anymore.
- E. Vil claims that as not all of the copyright holders of the work he obtained are suing, they cannot sue at all.
That's obviously an absurd defense. I suppose you agree.
I spoke about Linux as a whole, not in small parts.
Yes, you talked about "mak[ing] Linux [as a whole] a non-free program". But since this would violate the license of the whole, it would also violate the license of each of its parts (some double-licensed parts perhaps excluded).
For example you could do something like: take Linux, someone sues, you remove the infringing bit, continue distributing a non-free version of Linux, and simply wait until someone "sues" again (have any of the cases listed on gpl-violations.org gone go court?),
Yes, it's written there on the site (and was discussed here when it happened AFAIR).
and only do the minimal to comply with the bits you are infringing on.
So, if the one who sues is Linus Torvalds? You'd have to spend quite some effort to identify and remove hit "bits", and even more replacing them so you get something working again. And all that only in order to wait for Alan Cox to sue you next (in which will probably a rather simple court decision, given that it will be the same situation applied to the next "few" source lines), etc. And even in the meantime you probably can't do much with your non-free version if you don't want to become liable for damages (probably for intentional violation, at least from the second time). Seems like an even sillier tactic than SCO's, IMHO. IANAL.
Frank