Re: Open Source licensing, Take 2

From: Edward Cherlin <cherlin_at_pacbell_dot_net>
Date: Tue May 10 2005 - 17:26:16 CDT

On Tuesday 10 May 2005 14:59, Edmund R. Kennedy wrote:
> Hello:
>
> While all your points on various licenses are
> important, one thing you seem to be neglecting is the
> body of case law surrounding whichever license you are
> examining. A contract or license is only as good as
> the last court case it went through.

If that.

> Thanks, Ed Kennedy

There are only a few cases concerning the GPL, e.g.
Fortinet settles GPL violation lawsuit
http://www.theregister.com/2005/04/29/fortinet_settles_gpl_lawsuit/
and, as far as I know, no significant precedents, but there are
even fewer cases for other licenses. That still counts in favor
of the GPL.

There is the lunatic--excuse me, frivolous Daniel Wallace suit
against FSF claiming that the GPL is illegal restraint of trade,
of course, even though it is a license entered into consensually
and in public by people trying to give away product, and not a
secret conspiracy of market-dominating companies to raise
prices.
http://linuxbusinessnews.sys-con.com/read/80782.htm

-- 
Edward Cherlin
Generalist & activist--Linux, languages, literacy and more
"A knot! Oh, do let me help to undo it!"
--Alice in Wonderland
http://cherlin.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
OVC discuss mailing lists
Send requests to subscribe or unsubscribe to arthur@openvotingconsortium.org
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
==================================================================
Received on Tue May 31 23:17:32 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue May 31 2005 - 23:17:52 CDT