Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled

[David Kastrup]

Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> writes:

> Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com> wrote:
>> On 2/22/2010 1:42 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>>> What matters is that the terms and conditions in the GPL are legally
>>> valid, and have now been tested in an appeals court in the United States
>>> of America.
>
>> That was the Artistic License, not the GPL, but good enough.
>
> Ah, thanks!  I thought there was something a little wrong.  Still, if
> the artistic license holds up, the GPL'll be a doddle.

I don't see how that follows.  They are licenses with a somewhat similar
basic legal mechanism (based on copyright, granting additional
permissions), but the actual license is quite different.  So I see no
base for the "AFPL holds -> GPL doddle" claim.  I see no qualitative
difference discussed that would support such a gradation.

-- 
David Kastrup