Re: Open source licenses upheld

[Alexander Terekhov]

Tim Smith wrote:
[...]
> You'd have a good point if the alleged copyright liability was for
> downloading the file.  However, the copyright liability is for what the
> defendant did with the file AFTER downloading.

You seem to misunderstand. Downloading is irrelevant in this case. Think
of making copies of JMRI work by typing it from memory after reading
some book made by a third party. The first question is whether some
conditions must be satisfied BEFORE becoming a licensee in order to
exercise the right. That is condition precedent. Something like "before
you make initial copy of my work you must send me ten dollars and be a
member of The Anticopyleft Foundation". The next question is what are
the license scope limitations (e.g. "you can make only ten copies") and
covenants (e.g. "you must send me one dollar for each copy made, and ...
and ... and"). Failure to send ten dollars (satisfy condition precedent)
prior to copying or making more than ten copies (exceeding the scope)
creates copyright liability. But the Artistic License contains neither
conditions precedent nor scope limitations. It contains only covenants.

regards,
alexander.

--
"Copyright license -> Copyright law
 Contract -> Contract law

 DUH!"
             -- mini-RMS <rms@1407.org>