Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Unix

Journal ThePhilips's Journal: Case GPL v. anti-trust regulations concluded.

Interesting C|Net piece How GPL fits in with the future of antitrust regulation about case which wanted to challenge GPL on anti-trust grounds. Quotes:

The plaintiff in the case, Daniel Wallace, has wanted to compete with Linux by offering a derivative work or by writing an operating system from the ground up. He argued that he has been barred from doing so, while Linux and its derivatives can be obtained at no charge. He asserted that IBM, Red Hat and Novell have conspired to eliminate competition in the operating-system market by making Linux available at an "unbeatable" price: free.

The court found Wallace's theory to be "faulty substantively." The decision pointed out that "the goal of antitrust law is to use rivalry to keep prices low for consumers' benefit." Here, the court concluded that Wallace sought to employ "antitrust law to drive prices up," which would "turn (antitrust law) on its head."

Common sense prevailed.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Case GPL v. anti-trust regulations concluded.

Comments Filter:

"Life is a garment we continuously alter, but which never seems to fit." -- David McCord

Working...