SCO to argue GPL invalid

SCO WILL attempt to win its $3 billion case against IBM by arguing that the General Public Licence (GPL) is invalid.
That’s what a pleader at legal practice Boies Schiller and Flexner is telling the Wall Street Journal today.
The GPL licence allows software and work derived from it to be copied by anyone at no charge.
But according to today’s WSJ, quoting lawyer Mark Heise, the GPL is pre-empted by US federal copyright law.
How does that work then? According to Heise, federal law only lets people make a single backup copy of software, and that makes the GPL void under US law.
Seems like a bloody flimsy argument to us, but in the topsy-turvy Alice in Wonderland world of law, who knows what characters might suddenly turn into wild cards?
In effect, Heise’s argument seems to be that you have to have copyright on software even if you insist that your software is not copyrighted. D’oh.
Of course GPL software is copyright and only public domain works, apparently, lack copyright protection, maybe. The GPL specifically makes use of copyright holders’ authority to grant the right to copy authorisations.
Effectively, GPL does not remove the copyright of the original author, it instead allows the work to be freely distributed as long as the distributions and works derived from them are also made available under the licence.

Related posts

Mixed Messages, Linux and XP

When Microsoft released a new version of Windows last week, Rob Malda — one of the creators of…
Read more

U.S. vs. MS: It's Almost Over

WASHINGTON — The U.S. government’s antitrust pursuit of Microsoft is nearly over. On…
Read more

Review: Mac OS X 10.1

To the hundreds of millions of Windows users, news about Macintosh enhancements might barely…
Read more