For Approval: GPLv3

[Donovan Hawkins]

On Sat, 1 Sep 2007, Alexander Terekhov wrote:

> Judge Saris:
>
> http://pacer.mad.uscourts.gov/dc/opinions/saris/pdf/progress%20software.pdf
>
> "DENIED"

What was this case supposed to show exactly? That you can't get a 
*preliminary* injunction when the defendant might not be infringing, might 
be in compliance, and would suffer far greater harm than you? Seems quite 
reasonable to me.

Did you think I wouldn't read it or something?


"Affidavits submitted by the parties experts raise 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."

"Moreover, I am not persuaded based on this record that the release of the 
Gemini source code in July 2001 didnt cure the breach."

"Finally, because the product line using MySQL is a significant portion of 
NuSpheres business, Progress has demonstrated that the balance of harms 
tips in its favor regarding the use of the MySQL program under the GPL."


Which of those says "GPL is a contract so you aren't eligible for 
injunctive relief"?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Donovan Hawkins, PhD                 "The study of physics will always be
Software Engineer                     safer than biology, for while the
hawkins at cephira.com                   hazards of physics drop off as 1/r^2,
http://www.cephira.com                biological ones grow exponentially."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------