[GNUz] Important Court victory for Open Source and Free Software Licensing

[Nick Rout]

Those who read slashdot may have already picked up on the fact that
the US Court of Appeals for Federal Circuits has issued a decision
resoundlingly favourable to those seeking to enforce open source/free
software licenses like the GPL. The case in fact involved the
Artistic License, but the reasoning is generally applicable.

The case makes interesting reading (some of it bogs down in
jurisdictional issues, but the rest is pretty plain.). In particular:

1. Recognition of the growth and widespread use of public licenses
(reference to MIT's use of Creative Commons for its courseware,
GNU/Linux, Perl, Apache, Firefox, Wikipedia etc.)

2. The recognition of the economic benefits of free/open licensed
copyrighted work. "Traditionally, copyright owners sold their
copyrighted material in exchange for money. The lack of money changing
hands in open source licensing should not be presumed to mean that
there is no economic consideration, however. There are substantial
benefits, including economic benefits, to the creation and
distribution of copyrighted works under public licenses that range far
beyond traditional license royalties. For example, program creators
may generate market share for their programs by providing certain
components free of charge. Similarly, a programmer or company may
increase its national or international reputation by incubating open
source projects. Improvement to a product can come rapidly and free of
charge from an expert not even known to the copyright holder. The
Eleventh Circuit has recognized the economic motives inherent in
public licenses, even where profit is not immediate."

3. Recognition that the license created conditions on the use of the
software, rather than a breach of contract. This is significant
because a mere breach of a contractual provision renders the wrongdoer
only liable in damages (which usually can't be proved) whereas a
breach of a condition renders the use of the material copyright
infringement, which can be stopped with a court injunction.

The decision is short at 16 pages and quite readable:

http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions/08-1001.pdf

Comment by Laurence Lessig:

http://lessig.org/blog/2008/08/huge_and_important_news_free_l.html

The usual mixture of amusing and ill-informed comment on /.:

http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/08/13/1857241&from=rss