Subject: Re: conducting a sane and efficient GPLv3, LGPLv3 Review
From: Arnoud Engelfriet <arnoud@engelfriet.net>
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 19:38:05 +0200

John Cowan wrote:
> Indeed.  Furthermore, as has been pointed out many times, it is suicidal
> for a defendant to directly attack the GPL's validity, as without the
> public license they would be exposed to the full rigor of copyright
> infringement.

It does make sense, if you regard the GPL as a contract: you
would then attack the obligation to release source (or whatever
bothers you) as being invalid, and ask for the rest of the
contract to remain in force.

This presumes that the clause is severable and not so central
to the whole GPL that the judge will hold the rest up, but
that's the theory.

Arnoud

-- 
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch & European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
              Arnoud blogt nu ook: http://blog.iusmentis.com/