Subject: Re: Judge does not rule on GPL
From: Ian Lance Taylor <ian@airs.com>
Date: 28 Feb 2002 09:29:46 -0800

Ben_Tilly@trepp.com writes:

> Story:
>   http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/02/02/27/020227hnmysql.xml
> 
> My take is that if the judge issues a preliminary judgement along the
> lines of what she suggested were likely, there will be significant
> impacts for various fsb business models because it will be harder to
> enforce the GPL.  MySQL AB's business model is a dual-licensing model
> similar to Sleepycat and others.  (You can get it GPL, or you can pay to
> be proprietary.)  Pure GPL branding models (eg Red Hat) would obviously
> also be affected.  I don't know what input can be given in the case at
> this point, but some here may wish to try.

I don't see it.  The judge is declining to issue a preliminary
injunction against NuSphere on the basis of the GPL.  I don't see why
that fact in itself means anything about FSB business models.

If the judge made a final judgement that the GPL termination clause
did not apply, that would matter a great deal.  In fact, the risk of
that happening is such that I personally think it's a very bad idea to
bring the GPL into court at all.

However, the lack of a preliminary injunction means only that the
judge does not see that the GPL violation constitutes irreparable harm
to MySQL AB.  To my lay view, she's right: the harm can easily be
repaired at any time, and therefore can not be said to be irreparable.

Ian