From joao@silvaneves.org Fri Jan 25 00:35:45 2002
On Qui, 2002-01-24 at 23:19, Joerg Schilling wrote:
From joao@silvaneves.org Thu Jan 24 23:32:34 2002 On Qui, 2002-01-24 at 22:17, Joerg Schilling wrote:
If someone abuses your code you may sue this person and will get you righ=
t in a=20
way so the abusing person hast to give you money later (enforced by the c=
ourt).
This is because you cannot enforce a license agreement if not both partie=
s
agreed on it. =20
(I'm assuming that Germany autorship/copyright law has something in common with the USA, Portuguese and Spanish ones. I'm almost convinced that's not always so...)
Authorship law in Portugal defines that you can't modify the work protected by copyright unless the author has given you permission to do so. This means that they are in one of 2 positions: They didn't asked for your permission, and so they've commited a crime, or they've accepted the GPL as your permission and, by not obliging to it, they've also commited a crime. Obviously I'm not a lawyer, just an engineer who has read too many legislation (including some international "copyright" treaties).
This looks similar and IO am sure that German and Portuguese copyright law have more in common than german and USA Copyright.
Of course, there are two aspects of the case. One is the civil acspect of the case and another is the crimnal aspect. Going only the way of sueing for the criminal aspect will take many years while starting with the civil case before will help to get a fast start.
The main problem seems that my lawyer does not see a way to enforce the other person to publish the modifications.
Jörg
EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) If you don't have iso-8859-1 schilling@fokus.gmd.de (work) chars I am J"org Schilling URL: http://www.fokus.gmd.de/usr/schilling ftp://ftp.fokus.gmd.de/pub/unix
Joerg Schilling wrote, on January 25, 2002:
From joao@silvaneves.org Thu Jan 24 23:32:34 2002 Please give a copy of Eben Moglen's "Enforcing the GPL" articles to your lawyer (http://emoglen.law.columbia.edu/). Eben Moglen will, probably, be very interested in the case. Contact him (FSF can help there) and try to get him and your lawyer in touch.
Let me check this later, it is too late now......
You should email him: Eben Moglen moglen@columbia.edu He also teachs in Europe (Holland) and I am sure he would be very concern about that. He is the father of the GPL and a lawyer.
At least this is what I think after meeting him last summer in Bordeaux "Libre software meeting".
Anne
On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 12:47:38AM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Of course, there are two aspects of the case. One is the civil acspect of the case and another is the crimnal aspect. Going only the way of sueing for the criminal aspect will take many years while starting with the civil case before will help to get a fast start.
The main problem seems that my lawyer does not see a way to enforce the other person to publish the modifications.
Well, might I suggest your ditching your evidently inadequate and timorous lawyer and getting someone who has a clue about copyright and free software? FFS, it's a fairly simple case, and you're allowing him to be bamboozled over it. Stop it.
Hi,
On Fri, 25 Jan 2002 Joerg Schilling kindly wrote:
--snip--
On Qui, 2002-01-24 at 23:19, Joerg Schilling wrote:
From joao@silvaneves.org Thu Jan 24 23:32:34 2002 On Qui, 2002-01-24 at 22:17, Joerg Schilling wrote:
If someone abuses your code you may sue this person and will get you righ=
t in a=20
way so the abusing person hast to give you money later (enforced by the c=
ourt).
This is because you cannot enforce a license agreement if not both partie=
s
agreed on it.
If there's no explicit verbal agreement, there still can be a silent one (konkludente Einwilligung). For dietails why this is applicable to the GPL in European countries, see the article I sent you (soon available for others at www.fsf.or.at). If the user of your programm still says he didn't agree he is a *thief*. Which, under most countries laws should be worse for him than a simple breach of contract.
=20
(I'm assuming that Germany autorship/copyright law has something in common with the USA, Portuguese and Spanish ones. I'm almost convinced that's not always so...)
Authorship law in Portugal defines that you can't modify the work protected by copyright unless the author has given you permission to do so. This means that they are in one of 2 positions: They didn't asked for your permission, and so they've commited a crime, or they've accepted the GPL as your permission and, by not obliging to it, they've also commited a crime. Obviously I'm not a lawyer, just an engineer who has read too many legislation (including some international "copyright" treaties).
This looks similar and IO am sure that German and Portuguese copyright law have more in common than german and USA Copyright.
There is *no* Copyright in Europe. In most european countries we have the concept of Authors Rights. Difference in a Nutshell: Copyright is protecting the editor or publisher of a work, ie his (monetary) investment in producing copys. That's why it's called "Copyright".
In Europe, the *authors* personal, idealistic rights are at least as important as his (notice the difference: it's still the author) economic rights. That's why we're talking about Urheberrecht, Diritto d'Autore, Droit d'Auteur etc.
Of course, there are two aspects of the case. One is the civil acspect of the case and another is the crimnal aspect. Going only the way of sueing for the criminal aspect will take many years while starting with the civil case before will help to get a fast start.
Three aspects: The contractual, the author's rights (and here: personal & economic rights) and the criminal. Those aspects do interfere. You can accuse a thief (so he might go to jail) and/or sue him for the damage he has done to you (-> monetary compensation). The latter can (but dosn't have to) be done in connection with a criminal proceeding.
The copyright aspect is iomportant, because it gives the violater of a licence the right to choose if he wants to pay for your damage or accept the license (ie publish the source code). The latter might be more reasonable for him in many cases. Interesting article on that in the (german) Linuxmagazin 01/2002; should be available soon at www.ifross.de (where you'll find more on the subject).
The main problem seems that my lawyer does not see a way to enforce the other person to publish the modifications.
Get yourself another. I would recommend Till Jaeger and Axel Metzger (they should be reading this list from time to time) and of course, get in contact with Georg Greeve - who should comment on this matter very soon...