
Major legal victory for open source in US (Java Model Railroad Interface case) - pmjordan
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Major-legal-victory-for-open-source-in-US-936089.html
======
btilly
For people who don't know, the license in this case is the Artistic License.
It is substantially weaker than the GPL. So if the Artistic License can be
upheld, then the GPL is definitely OK.

Of course the important precedent isn't the final settlement. At this point
that was a foregone conclusion. It is the US Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit a year and a half ago. See
<http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions/08-1001.pdf> for the details of that
settlement.

This precedent was doubly important given how horrible the first ruling in
this case was.

------
angelbob
It's hard to tell if this validates the GPL. They were found guilty of DMCA
violations for removing copyright and redistributing, but does that say
anything about the validity of the license itself?

~~~
pmjordan
At the very least it doesn't seem to have loosened the terms of the GPL - if
the virality clause had been deemed invalid, Katzer would presumably have been
able to use the code for his purposes. The GPL does however contain a
defensive clause that effectively reverts to "all rights reserved" if the
license is not accepted, so who knows.

~~~
ajross
It's worth pointing out that the "virality clause" doesn't actually exist;
it's just spin from old internet flames.

The GPL says that derived works can only be distributed under the GPL. The
restriction is on distribution, not license. If you accidentally (or whatever)
write something like a gdb port to a new language and try to sell it under a
proprietary license, the FSF can make you stop selling it under that license.

But that's it. Your new code doesn't "suddenly become GPL and public". It's
your code, and you get to decide the license, even if you can't legally give
it to anyone else. I guess if you want to pick a metaphor, it's been
quarantined. It hasn't been "infected".

~~~
Herring
If you somehow got Windows source code into your program, you couldn't
distribute it without getting sued. If you liked FUD, you could say the
Microsoft license (do not distribute without MS permission) has spread to your
code. That's just how all licenses work. If you don't agree to the terms,
don't use the code.

------
dan_the_welder
I just took a look at the JMRI page and it's very a very cool little niche
market ecosystem. Software and hardware both.

Yet another advanced peripheral system, Train CNC!

~~~
jrockway
It's called DCC, actually:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Command_Control>

~~~
dan_the_welder
Metaphor: "It's train CNC!"

Simile: "It's like CNC for trains!"

Literal truth: "It's called DCC actually"

If your point was to add information, then there was a better way to do it.

~~~
jrockway
At least I was trying to add information, where you were just making a dumb
joke and then a dumb personal attack.

~~~
dan_the_welder
I was enthusiastically commenting on a healthy niche market and then I used a
metaphor point out that it's not just a hobby or a toy that these people are
working on. It's a sophisticated tool that interfaces with the outside world
much like CNC, which happens to be my area of interest.

