(OT) - Major Blow to Copyleft Theory

[Alexander Terekhov]

On 8/29/07, Matthew Flaschen <matthew.flaschen at gatech.edu> wrote:
> Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > The standard for PI under copyright infringement claim includes
> > presumption of irreparable harm. The judge didn't apply it (and used a
> > contract standard instead).
>
> She did consider, "a factual dispute concerning whether the Gemini
> program is a derivative or an independent and separate work under
> GPL ¶ 2.  After hearing, MySQL seems to have the better argument here,
> but the matter is one of fair dispute."  Obviously, derivative works are
> clearly a copyright law issue.

Yeah, yeah. "Is static linking like two icons on one desktop?"

http://web.archive.org/web/20040803222641/http://web.novalis.org/talks/lsm-talk-2004/slide-31.html

<quote copyright=Free Software Foundation>

Don't go to court

FSF hasn't.
Court is expensive
Judges don't understand technology
   "Is static linking like two icons on one desktop?"
       -Judge Saris, MySQL v. Nusphere oral argument

</quote>

Translation: the FSF doesn't really believe that they could fool a
judge into buying

http://web.archive.org/web/20040927045018/http://web.novalis.org/talks/compliance-for-developers/slide-49.html

[begin textual copying copyright=Free Software Foundation]

July 27, 2004 GPL Compliance for Software Developers Legal notes
----------------------------------------------------------------

Legal notes

Static linking creates a derivative work through textual copying

Most dynamic linking cases involve distributing the library

Still a derivative work:

Dynamic linking

Distributing only the executable (testtriangle)

Still a derivative work:

Distributing the source code of software which links to a library

[end textual copying]

FSF's "legal notes" idiocy.

> But the ruling primarily seemed to consider trademarks.

http://pacer.mad.uscourts.gov/dc/opinions/saris/pdf/progress%20software.pdf

You can't read or what? "With respect to the General Public
License..." part has absolutely nothing to do with trademarks.

regards,
alexander.