GPL vs EULA

Are you a Linux advocate? Post your success stories here.
Locked
User avatar
Void Main
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5716
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2003 5:24 am
Location: Tuxville, USA
Contact:

GPL vs EULA

Post by Void Main » Thu Apr 24, 2003 8:00 pm

30 page PDF:
http://www.cybersource.com.au/cyber/abo ... o_eula.pdf

I'll try and get it converted to HTML and host it on this site.

TheQuirk
programmer
programmer
Posts: 114
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2003 4:11 pm

Post by TheQuirk » Thu Apr 24, 2003 8:04 pm

And while he's doing that, you can view Google's HTML version over here.

User avatar
Void Main
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5716
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2003 5:24 am
Location: Tuxville, USA
Contact:

Post by Void Main » Thu Apr 24, 2003 8:20 pm

I'm done doing that:

http://voidmain.is-a-geek.net/docs/comp ... _eula.html

The PDF is much prettier, too bad I hate PDF.

excerpt:
Executive Summary

In this analysis, we review both the Microsoft EULA and the GPL used for most Free/Open Source Software. We particularly look at what the similarities and differences are between these two licenses. We will also try and provide a quantitative determination of what positives both licenses carry for you, the user, along what the negatives are.

In general, a large part of the Microsoft EULA concerns itself with limiting your use of the software, and with absolving Microsoft from any responsibilities it may have with respect to the warranty. In contrast, the GPL spends most of its time specifying the rights allocated users, and to responsibilities for the use of the software from the perspective of software distributors or programmers who incorporate GPL code. Few user-level restrictions are evident.

It is one of the more generally repeated presumptions of users who select to purchase and operate Microsoft's applications released under the EULA (over corresponding Open Source applications released under the GPL,) that they do so because they have someone to hold legally responsible in case of application software failure or catastrophic error. A close reading of the EULA reveals that the licence explicitly removes all avenues and all recourse that a user of Microsoft's software has for legal relief of any sort. At best, you may recover the cost of the software product, or US$5.

Further, to the best of the authors' knowledge, no single person or organisation which is a user of Microsoft's software has ever successfully litigated against Microsoft with respect to application software failure or catastrophic error, in the 27 years of their operation. If you are aware of any such instance, we would welcome full details.

What follows is not legal advice but the opinion of the author as to the practical management interpretations and a very brief overview of both licenses, highlighting what proportion (simply enumerated by highlighted paragraph section line-count) of each license allocates rights to you, takes rights from you, or limits your rights to legal relief (i.e, suing the purveyor of the software.) This is not intended as anything more than a cursory and simple quantitative analysis of each license, to give an indication of the core areas of focus and overall flavour.

User avatar
Void Main
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5716
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2003 5:24 am
Location: Tuxville, USA
Contact:

Post by Void Main » Fri Apr 25, 2003 9:34 am

Please continue this thread here.

Locked