(OT) - Major Blow to Copyleft Theory

[Alexander Terekhov]

On 8/28/07, Matthew Flaschen <matthew.flaschen at gatech.edu> wrote:
> Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> >> I disagree.  Every FOSS license provides an exchange of promises
> >
> > Exactly.
>
> The point *you're missing* is that an exchange of promises, where one
> side is conditionally promising not to enforce existing copyright
> rights, can be seen as a unilateral license, and that there is no need
> to invoke contract law.

Let Judge Saris know about that. She must have been deeply mistaken,
just like Judge White.

http://pacer.mad.uscourts.gov/dc/opinions/saris/pdf/progress%20software.pdf
("With respect to the General Public License...")

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). Note also "portion breach of contract
claim" and "didn't cure the breach" wording (one just can't "cure" a
copyright violation). Finally, that decision is tagged as "Nature of
Suit: 190" and that's neither 820/840 nor 190/820/840 (all three).

http://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov/documents/natsuit.pdf

190 is CONTRACT/Other Contract
820 is PROPERTY RIGHTS/Copyrights
840 is PROPERTY RIGHTS/Trademark

regards,
alexander.