conducting a sane and efficient GPLv3, LGPLv3 Review

[Alexander Terekhov]

On 8/2/07, Smith, McCoy <mccoy.smith at intel.com> wrote:
> Someone previously did a pointer to this article, which might be
> considered a relevant citation:
>
> http://www.usfca.edu/law/determann/softwarecombinations060403.pdf
>
> It's pretty detailed but seems to at least tangentially discuss the
> issue (with lots of case cites).

In addition, Zak might want to visit the following links

http://www.law.washington.edu/LCT/Events/FOSS/MootFacts.pdf
(Moot Court Statements of Fact)

http://www.law.washington.edu/LCT/Events/FOSS/OmegaBrief.pdf
(Omega Plaintiff's Brief)

http://www.law.washington.edu/LCT/Events/FOSS/AlphaBrief.pdf
(Alpha Defendant's Brief)

http://www.law.washington.edu/LCT/Events/FOSS/media/03.%20Beyond%20the%20Basics%20-%20Moot%20Court.mp3
(Hearing and Q&A)

-------
The Scope of "Derivative Works" as Applied to Software: David Bender of White
& Case LLP and author of Computer Law and Ieuan Mahony of Holland & Knight
LLP will argue the proper scope of "derivative work" under U.S. copyright law
when applied to software, before a panel of distinguished federal appellate
judges:

* HONORABLE WILLIAM C. BRYSON, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
* HONORABLE HALDANE ROBERT MAYER, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
* HONORABLE MARGARET MCKEOWN, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
-------

There were a whole bunch of remarkable remarks from judges.

Like "what is a license if not a contract", "the real word issue" of
preemption, "intent" is not really helpful, etc. etc.

Hth.

regards,
alexander.