The District Court for the Northern District of California1 recently issued an opinion that is being hailed as a victory for open source software. In this case, the court denied a motion to dismiss a lawsuit alleging violation of an open source software license, paving the way for further action enforcing the conditions of the GNU General Public License ("GPL").
[...] Artifex's complaint asserts that Hancom's violations of the conditions of the GPL constitute both copyright infringement and breach of contract. Artifex has requested remedies including compensatory, consequential, and statutory damages, as well as attorneys' fees and costs. Artifex also sought injunctive relief barring further infringement by Hancom and requiring Hancom to comply with obligations under the GPL. Hancom moved to dismiss Artifex's complaint on several grounds. The District Court denied Hancom's motion to dismiss on each ground.
[...] Here, in denying a motion to dismiss, the District Court only holds that the claims may proceed on the theories enunciated by Artifex, not necessarily that they will ultimately succeed. Still, the case represents a significant step forward for open source plaintiffs.
[...] In the past decade, while enforcement of open source licensing violations has become more common, few enforcement cases result in published law. The open source community will be watching this case carefully, and this initial decision vindicates the rights of the open source authors to enforce GPL terms on both breach of contract and copyright theories.
ARTIFEX SOFTWARE, INC. v. HANCOM, INC.
(Score: 2) by MrGuy on Saturday May 06 2017, @05:02PM (1 child)
Also interesting in this - Hancom seemed to argue that an unsigned "shrinkwrap" license doesn't constitute a valid "meeting of the minds" for a contract to be established. Defendant contends that Plaintiff's reliance on the unsigned GNU GPL fails to plausibly demonstrate mutual assent, that is, the existence of a contract.
Had they succeeded on that point, it could potentially be disastrous for ALL software licenses - not just FOSS ones.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_form_contract [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 2) by cafebabe on Saturday May 06 2017, @09:48PM
I've seen this before and Hancom is likely to lose. If a legal eagle asks a respondant "tort [wikipedia.org] or contract [wikipedia.org] law?" then the respondant is probably going to lose.
1702845791×2