Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 3/10/2010 10:58 AM, RJack wrote:
The truth of the matter is that there is no victory for "open
source licenses". "Open source" licenses and "proprietary" are
interpreted using the exact same rules. Each license (contract) is
individually interpreted according to the state common law of
contracts.
This was a victory for open licenses because a court upheld the
understanding that if the conditions of the license are not met, then
copying and distributing is infringement. That this victory may
apply to other forms of licenses does not lessen the victory for open
licenses.
Sigh... That's nothing new. If conditions precedent are not satisfied in
a proprietary license the same thing results. The Artistic license had
no conditions precedent -- only covenants. One erroneous decision by
a non-precedental court is hardly a victory. The CAFC's clear error can
never harm anyone other than Katzer.
Sincerely,
RJack :)
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
