[Bf-committers] extension clause

Alex Combas blenderwell at gmail.com
Fri Nov 19 23:40:22 CET 2010

On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 1:25 PM, Matt Henley <nwmatt at gmail.com> wrote:

> I agree that company lawyers tend to be paranoid.  I deal with that
> frequently in oil/gas equipment manufacturing.
Right, I'm just saying this is the view that some companies would have.

I'm not saying this is my view, or the right view, or even a smart view.

> > Imagine the fear that making just one false step and you could be legally
> > forced to open-source your top secret proprietary project.
> >
> Has anyone here ever heard of a single case where a company has been forced
> to opensource their code due to the gpl?  Every case that I have ever seen,
> the "guilty" party was given a choice:
Well the GPL has never been defended in court from what I've heard, so
there has been many public cases of companies infringing upon the GPL that I
heard about they must have always come to terms in one way or another
resorting to litigation (so far).

That doesn't mean that companies would not still be paranoid about this type
of thing happening to them.

More information about the Bf-committers mailing list