The thing that angers me about this, is that the user could legally access this software from his Laptop, albeit over an inferior third-party interface.
His choice was between accessing the software over a display proxy, and accessing the software locally. The provided functionality was essentially the same either way.
I don't understand how this minor technical distinction should be worth 30 kCHF.
CERN had the option to negotiate for a traveling license and declined to do so.
The fact that there was a technically inferior workaround means jack shit. Yes, it's technically inferior, that's why you should pay for the real thing.
"A workaround to your licensing deal existed so I wasn't violating your licensing deal!" is nonsense.
It's not "arbitrary." The contract didn't allow it. CERN didn't buy it.
And even if it were "abritrary," the time to discuss that is when you are negotiating the software license with your vendor. This isn't shrinkwrap software being sold at ElBo under a clickwrap license. It's a sophisticated buyer who has a staff member dedicated to the job.
You can tell "roaming license" was valuable because this student went to a warez site to get around it. The vendor likely charges more for it, and CERN didn't want to pay it, so CERN voluntarily left that functionality off the table. Then the student decided to overrule CERN's negotiating and the rules CERN had explicitly set out[1]. Oops.
I don't get to decide the GPL is stupid and release modified software without source.
His choice was between accessing the software over a display proxy, and accessing the software locally. The provided functionality was essentially the same either way.
I don't understand how this minor technical distinction should be worth 30 kCHF.