'DITisTV' violating XBMC's GPLv2. Refusing to share source
Both XBMC Foundation and Wordpress are represented by SFLC. My guess is that they are trying to find a way to gain control over distribution via trademarks while with copyleft licenses this simply isn't possible. Using contract law-like structures within trademarks to do this seems really stupid since it breaks GPL while distribution still isn't controlled.

They also claim Addons have to be GPL (in the case of Wordpress) which I also think is silly. For XBMC this would mean that all illegal addons are non-derived and thus XBMC is always responsible. But this discussion was only in Worpress camp with no mention to XBMC. I wonder what their statement about this is. But if they speak about it, they either support Wordpress or XBMC: Wordpress wants controll all over it's ecosystem and XBMC doesn't want to be liable for facilitating copyright infringements, breaking patent law or breaking contract law (TOS, EULA of online services) via Addons.

Seem like a tough choice for SFLC.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: 'DITisTV' violating XBMC's GPLv2. Refusing to share source - by Robotica - 2015-05-07, 14:57
Logout Mark Read Team Forum Stats Members Help
'DITisTV' violating XBMC's GPLv2. Refusing to share source2