Jacobsen v. Katzer - Revision history

CCID-rob: Reverted edits by CCID-rob (talk) to last revision by Rob Williams

2015-12-15T01:11:23Z

Reverted edits by CCID-rob (talk) to last revision by Rob Williams

CCID-rob: Template rebuild.

2015-12-15T01:07:16Z

Template rebuild.

Rob Williams at 17:03, 21 January 2013

2013-01-21T17:03:19Z

CCID-diane peters at 12:33, 9 November 2012

2012-11-09T12:33:08Z

Aurelia Schultz at 23:46, 1 December 2011

2011-12-01T23:46:00Z

Aurelia Schultz at 20:41, 28 November 2011

2011-11-28T20:41:28Z

U.S. Curator: Category:USA

2011-09-12T18:48:40Z

Category:USA

Ingmar: Formatting cleanup (i.e. made it readable)

2011-02-02T00:38:30Z

Formatting cleanup (i.e. made it readable)

Show changes

Akozak at 23:12, 13 October 2010

2010-10-13T23:12:50Z

Akozak: Undo revision 39736 by Akozak (Talk)

2010-08-11T17:54:58Z

Undo revision 39736 by Akozak (Talk)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:11, 15 December 2015
Line 140:		Line 140:
	}}		}}
	[[Category:USA]]		[[Category:USA]]
−
−	~~Test.~~

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:07, 15 December 2015
Line 140:		Line 140:
	}}		}}
	[[Category:USA]]		[[Category:USA]]
		+
		+	Test.

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 |date=2010/02/22
 |description=Open source software case involving the Artistic License, involving alleged violation of the license that results in copyright infringement rather than contract violation
-|summary=NOTE: This summary needs to be updated for the Feb. 2010 decision by the Federal Circuit
+|summary=NOTE: This summary needs to be updated for the Feb. 2010 decision by the Federal Circuit.  In an unpublished order, the Federal Circuit dismissed the case by agreement of the parties on February 22, 2010, without reaching the merits.
 '''CC DIMENSION:'''

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 |court=United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
 |date=2010/02/22
-|description=Open source software case where violation of the open source license did create copyright infringement
+|description=Open source software case involving the Artistic License, involving alleged violation of the license that results in copyright infringement rather than contract violation
 |summary=NOTE: This summary needs to be updated for the Feb. 2010 decision by the Federal Circuit
-'''CC ASPECT:'''
+'''CC DIMENSION:'''
-A model train hobbyist who had developed open source software for controlling the movement of multiple trains on a track brought suit against a man and company that used this open source software in the creation of their own competing proprietary software.  The proprietary software did not contain any of the information required by the Artistic license under which the open source software was released.
+A model train hobbyist who had developed open source software brought suit against an individual and company using the software in competing proprietary software.  The proprietary software did not contain the attribution information required by the Artistic license under which the open source software was released.
-The District Court held that the Artistic license was a contract between the parties and remedies for breach of this contract could only sound in contract law, not as copyright infringement.  This holding was appealed to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.  Creative Commons participated in the submission of an amicus brief, asking the Court of Appeals to reverse the District Court.
+The District Court held that the Artistic license was a contract between the parties, and remedies for breach of the contract could only sound in contract law, not as copyright infringement.  This holding was appealed to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.  Creative Commons participated in the submission of an amicus brief, asking the Court of Appeals to reverse the District Court.
-The Court of Appeals found that the breach of a public license could sound in copyright infringement and remanded the case to the District Court.
+The Court of Appeals found that the the terms in the Artistic license were conditions and not covenants, and that suit could be brought seeking remedies for violation of copyright rather than the more limited remedies available under contract.  The appellate court remanded the case to the district court.
 '''BACKGROUND ON OTHER ISSUES:'''
-The case had other issues at the district court level, including a request for a preliminary injunction against the proprietary software makers to prevent them from accusing the plaintiff of patent infringement over patents the plaintiff claimed were invalid for reason of fraud on the patent office.
+The case involved other issues at the district court level, including a request for a preliminary injunction against the proprietary software makers to prevent them from accusing the plaintiff of patent infringement over patents the plaintiff claimed were invalid.
 '''PARTIES:'''

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 |court=United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
 |date=2010/02/22
 |summary=NOTE: This summary needs to be updated for the Feb. 2010 decision by the Federal Circuit
@@ Line 138: / Line 139: @@
 |related party=Plaintiff
 }}
 [[Category:USA]]

@@ Line 121: / Line 121: @@
 '''HOLDING:'''
-Violations of open source and public licenses are not enforceable through copyright infringement claims, not just as breaches of contract.
+Violations of open source and public licenses are enforceable through copyright infringement claims, not just as breaches of contract.
 }}
 {{Case Law Upload

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:48, 12 September 2011
Line 138:		Line 138:
	\|related party=Plaintiff		\|related party=Plaintiff
	}}		}}
		+
		+	[[Category:USA]]