(OT) - NOT A Major Blow to Copyleft Theory

Russ Nelson nelson at crynwr.com
Wed Feb 6 04:50:25 UTC 2008

Alexander Terekhov writes:
 > Here, however, Plaintiff has not retained any underlying copyright to
 > the Decoder Definition files and at no time or under any circumstance
 > do the exclusive copyright rights revert back to Plaintiff.

That's where the judge screwed up.  In fact the Plaintiff *does*
retain copyright, and grants a license ONLY under certain conditions.

The judge also doesn't understand that when software is freely
copyable, the main economic value to the Plaintiff is in having
authorship acknowledged.

--my blog is at    http://blog.russnelson.com   | Software that needs
Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok | documentation is software
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241       | that needs repair.
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  |     Sheepdog          | 

More information about the License-discuss mailing list