reddit.com/r/opensource/comments/am6xhj/host_agrees_to_dmca_takedown_of_gpld_work_after/
Appelate court ruled that the Artistic License was a Copyright License, _Overuled_ the lowercourt's opinion that the only damages available for the AL were contract damages. Now licensor can get copyright damages instead.
How does this hurt me, DIPSHIT? Oh, are you relying on the non-binding DICTA earlier in the case? SHOWS WHAT A FUCKING RETARD YOU ARE.
The ruling helps me. The court decided that the AL was a copyright license, overruling the "we have a contract here" ruling of the lower court. If the court found it was a contract then only contract damages would be awarded, as is their practice.
Artifex case involves a preliminary offer to do business where the company allows two means of acceptance of the offer: Pay for the commercial license, accept the GPL.
Not the GPL standing alone.
Both of these cases are cases where a licensee violates the license, and the court allows the licensor to recover.
Completely unrelated to a situation where the licensor revokes a completely gratis license and you FUCKING pieces of shit feel that you can punish the licensor for doing so.
It's very basic law of licenses, you fucking moron.
Your only other option is to beg the court under equity not to enforce the owner's legal right. Which, is the SFLC's game plan.
The GPL itself is NOT a contract.
Tell me how so, dipshit. It's you who seem to be unaware that licenses are revocable, that obeying a pre-existing legal duty is insufficient for consideration, that a non-exclusive license is NEVER a transfer of rights.
You just assume that because commercial copyright licenses are irrevocable outside of their terms that gratis ones are too. Same mistake PJ the paralegal made.
Nope, informing the lay people that gratis licenses /are/ revocable.
YHWH doesn't require consent. See Devarim chapter 22, verse 28 (key words: taphas, na'ar (hebrew), padia (greek Septuagint), puella (latin vulgate)). I know it conflicts with your western religion, but hopefully the muslims will completely destroy and dismantle it so there is no record left of your western religion ever existing on this earth.
The adult women infiltrate gratis projects, then rule over the men who actually built the project from the ground up. They are entryists and ENEMIES. They do this to every single hobby men build into a science or engineering field. I can't really say all women though, WHITE women.
Does that include that baby-faced faggot B.Kuhn who isn't even a lawyer and then suddenly learned one year that, if he was going to run a legal consulting firm, he'd better hire a lawyer instead of playing one... and then learned that a lawyer cannot be below lay persons in such a firm, so he made the woman the head of the place and pretends it was all for women's empowerment, thinking that no one knows the bar rules and can see through his bullshit? Is that the Software Freedom Conservancy's who's "clarification" I debunked within 5 hours of them posting? The one that ignores section 0 of the GPLv2 which defines "you" as the licensees (not the grantor) and falsely attempts to convince readers that section 4 is a "no revocation" clause when it is simply a clarification that if an upstream licensee loses his license through automatic rescission, the downstream licensees do not automatically suffer the same fate. That SFC? The one that "advises" its clients to "wait it out" so they can lose their standing via the statute of limitations running (Great advice B.Kuhn).
Yea, a bunch of fucking retards who basically commit legal malpractice against their clients as a "career". But you get what you pay for (and that also goes for licenses)