From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 1025b4,43ae7f61992b3213
X-Google-Attributes: gid1025b4,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,faf964ea4531e6af
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: tzs@halcyon.com (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: GPL and "free" software
Date: 1999/04/26
Message-ID: <7g2go4$fem$1@52-a-usw.rb1.blv.nwnexus.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 471172785
References: <7fibd5$jc7$1@news2.tor.accglobal.net>
 <m34sm64cz2.fsf@deneb.cygnus.stuttgart.netsurf.de>
 <7fudch$hsv$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <3723c38b@eeyore.callnetuk.com>
Organization: Institute of Lawsonomy
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,gnu.misc.discuss
Date: 1999-04-26T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Nick Roberts <nickroberts@callnetuk.com> wrote:
>Suppose party B obtains a work (of software), under the GPL, from party A
>(paying nothing for it).  Then suppose party B modifies this work to form a
>work which they then sell to party C (who is not aware of its GPL heritage)
>for a substantial amount of money.
>
>Now, suppose party C subsequently discovers the fact that the work is
>derived from a GPL work; what can they do?  It seems to me that if party C
>attempts to sue B, B can argue that C is not the injured party, because it
>is not C's licence who's terms were breached.  On the other hand, it seems
>to me that if party A attempts to sue B (on behalf of C), B can argue that A

Assuming party A is the copyright owner (if not, replace A with the owner),
then A does not sue on behalf of C.  A sues for himself for copyright
infringement.

--Tim Smith