For Approval: GPLv3
Donovan Hawkins
hawkins at cephira.com
Sat Sep 1 16:20:31 UTC 2007
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."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
More information about the License-discuss
mailing list