Contractors fired for using GPL code 13330

On 28 Oct 2005 11:59:22 -0700, Daeron

I would be disclosing identifiable information about the internal workings of a prior client. I can do this anonymously because it doesn't identify the client.

Even if I wasn't under NDA, it would still be unwise to violate the trust placed in my by my clients. A contractor lives by his reputation.

How would I know that information? Such information would be kept quiet and internal.

One could imagine that at least *SOME* of the cases listed here were because of Debt Management being unaware that the code being used was GPL'd, or what the GPL meant.

Also, let's look at a few others:

"According to a spokesperson for Net Media S.L., they were unaware of the license violations and took the site down as soon as they were informed about the situation."

"In most GPL violation cases, the real problem is that the company involved is unaware of its obligations under the license; GPL violations tend to be unintentional."

"This is not really Cisco's fault," Perens explained. "The GPL violation did not originate at Cisco, or Linksys. An off-shore subcontractor supplied Linux as part of the device."

Tim Smith has also mentioned similar experiences. Of course that doesn't stop you from pretending otherwise.

Uhh.. what are you talking about?

If that makes you sleep better at night, go for it.