But I don`t think even the SCO would get out of prison. After all, they have been distributing GPL software for some time now. No, they must assert that the entire GPL code is already de facto public, thanks to a kind of intellectual property of a „right of way“. But then, the same „priority theory“ would clearly make Unix as public (provided it`s not already present). What`s pleasing is that it basically destroys copyright, but in the way that`s totally opposite to their other crazy legal theory (which „We own all the software ever“). It would also achieve many of the FSF`s goals if it became law. The FreeBSD project stated that „the less published and unintentional use of the GPL is that it is very favorable to large companies that want to sub-co-own with software companies. In other words, the GPL is well suited for use as a marketing weapon that could reduce macroeconomic benefits and contribute to monopolistic behavior“ and that the GPL „can pose a real problem to those who want to market and profit from it.“  Each time you transmit a covered work, the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensors to perform, modify and distribute that work subject to this license. You are not responsible for third parties` compliance with this license.
Free software may impose certain obligations, but it is not as restrictive. In the example below, there is only the obligation for the user to see the necessary reference to his product. It`s usually just a quick copy and paste job that doesn`t limit a user`s rights to modify or distribute new products they create from open code. In April 2004, the Netfilter/iptables project was the subject of an injunction against Sitecom Germany by the Munich Regional Court, following Sitecom`s refusal to license Netfilter`s GPL software in violation of the terms of the GPL. Harald Welte of Netfilter was represented by Till Jaeger, co-founder of ifrOSS. In July 2004, the German court upheld this injunction as final against Sitecom.  The Court`s explanatory memorandum was as follows: if we explain to the employer that it is illegal to distribute the enhanced version outside of free software, the employer generally chooses to release it as free software instead of throwing it away. In 2002, MySQL AB Progress sued NuSphere in U.S. District Court for copyright and trademark infringement. NuSphere allegedly infringed MySQL copyright by tying MySQL`s GPL code to NuSphere Gemini`s table without complying with the license.
. . .