OSL 2.0 and linking of libraries

Forrest J. Cavalier III mibsoft at mibsoftware.com
Thu Apr 1 22:49:34 UTC 2004

> Read this and try to extrapolate it to software and static 
> linking [dynamic linking aside for a moment]:
> http://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/125_F3d_580.htm

If I were defending, and my attorney tried to cite only that
one as defense for a software license/copyright violation, I
wouldn't feel too confident.

> See also <http://lwn.net/2001/1108>.
> ("License agreements and first sale doctrine")
> Here's the ruling:
> http://tinyurl.com/3c2n2

(Does a denial of injunctive relief carry the same
weight of precedence as the outcome of a trial?)

If the ruling at that URL (Softman v Adobe) extends
to all software licenses and EULA's, and the Lee v
A.R.T. case applies to compiled works, then I have
serious doubts that most provisions of most of
the OSI-approved licenses mean anything at all for
most users of software.

It would mean that if one is simply going to compile,
link, and/or use software (and not edit the source, or
distribute copies) then licenses (open or closed-source)
can be ignored if you obtained a lawful copy.

license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3

More information about the License-discuss mailing list