Rjack wrote:
I agree that typically "provided that" may denote a contractual condition. So what?
<http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions/08-1001.pdf> We consider here the ability of a copyright holder to dedicate certain work to free public use and yet enforce an "open source" copyright license to control the future distribution and modification of that work. ... The District Court held that the open source Artistic License created an "intentionally broad" nonexclusive license which was unlimited in scope and thus did not create liability for copyright infringement. ... It is outside the scope of the Artistic License to modify and distribute the copyrighted materials without copyright notices and a tracking of modifications from the original computer files. ... The clear language of the Artistic License creates conditions to protect the economic rights at issue in the granting of a public license. ... For the aforementioned reasons, we vacate and remand. ... Having determined that the terms of the Artistic License are enforceable copyright conditions, ... So "open source" licenses work exactly the way they say they do, and not all of your spinning and twisting will change that. _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss