John mentioned this in his Tech5 podcast. Here’s a bit more detail:
A legal dispute involving model railroad hobbyists has resulted in a major courtroom victory for the free software movement also known as open-source software.
In a ruling Wednesday, the federal appeals court in Washington said that just because a software programmer gave his work away did not mean it could not be protected.
The decision legitimizes the use of commercial contracts for the distribution of computer software and digital artistic works for the public good. The court ruling also bolsters the open-source movement by easing the concerns of large organizations about relying on free software from hobbyists and hackers who have freely contributed time and energy without pay.
It also has implications for the Creative Commons license, a framework for modifying and sharing creative works that was developed in 2002 by Larry Lessig, a law professor at Stanford…
The plaintiff, Robert Jacobsen, said he believed that the court’s ruling was significant for the free software movement because it had thrived not on monetary gain but on individual credit for contributions.“We don’t charge for this and so all we really get is credit,” he said, adding that anyone is free to use and modify the programming instructions created by his group as long as they retain the credit and distribute them with the programmer’s instructions.
A significant victory protecting intellectual property rights – not requiring sale-for-profit to justify the distribution of creative work.
The article reminds folks where geek history comes from, as well.
How long until someone appeals by convincing the appeals court that the judge was fingerring himself during the trial and this invalidate his ruling?
The more heat carried, the less heat is needed.
Works the same way with any weapon.
Infinite supplies of nuclear weapons, depleted uranium bullets, and scatter bombs for every man, woman, and child, would be the safest strategy.
In mathematical terms,
As weapons approach infinity, danger approaches zero.
It’s really common sense, self-evident.
This is big news. I am surprised by how little coverage it is receiving from the popular media. If it’s not overturned in some other appeals court, it means that companies will have to prove that they don’t sell incorporated code, if challenged by the CC license owner.
Surprisingly, who would have though that an amateur train club would do more good for the open source community than IBM?
Even more surprising, who would have known that Creative Commons was good for anything?
3- “This is big news. I am surprised by how little coverage it is receiving from the popular media.”
Oh really? Are you THAT surprised? Popular media is in the hip pocket of the corporate media. They’re no more going to announce this decision, then they’re going to promote home brewed beer.
2- I think you posted to the wrong item. What’s free software got to do with weapons? Besides, your theory doesn’t include entropy. Aka, accidents. The more there is, the greater will be the accident rate. That’s what got everyone thinking nuclear disarmament in the first place.
Good decision.
Angel,
This was an appeals court.
#6 “Good decision.
This was an appeals court.”
If upheld it will apply to the whole US, otherwise…