Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Open source license litigation involves lawsuits surrounding open-source licensed software. Many of the legal rights of open source software licensors enforceable against users violating licensing agreements are untested by the U.S. legal system. [1] Free and open source software (FOSS) is distributed under a variety of free-software licenses ...
License compatibility is a legal framework that allows for pieces of software with different software licenses to be distributed together. The need for such a framework arises because the different licenses can contain contradictory requirements, rendering it impossible to legally combine source code from separately-licensed software in order to create and publish a new program.
IFOSS L. Rev. was intended to provide a neutral forum for debate and analysis of legal issues connected with Free and Open Source Software. Articles were subject to peer review where appropriate [2] and the editors exercise a policy of independence from sponsors and facilitators. [3]
In June 2009, the Software Freedom Law Center filed an amicus brief before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) calling for injunctive relief for open source developers. In the brief, SFLC argues that a Free, Libre, and Open Source Software (FLOSS) developer whose license has been violated should be able to call upon the courts ...
Industry and legal experts stated an Oracle victory could have created a chilling effect in software development, with copyright holders using the copyright on APIs to prevent their use in developing interoperable alternatives through reverse engineering, as common in open source software development.
Software copyright is the application of copyright in law to machine-readable software. While many of the legal principles and policy debates concerning software copyright have close parallels in other domains of copyright law, there are a number of distinctive issues that arise with software.
Open-source licenses are software licenses that allow content to be used, modified, and shared. They facilitate free and open-source software (FOSS) development. Intellectual property (IP) laws restrict the modification and sharing of creative works. Free and open-source licenses use these existing legal structures for an inverse purpose.
The Software Freedom Law Center acted as the FSF's law firm in the case. [3] The foundation asked the court to enjoin Cisco from further distributing Linksys firmware that contains FSF copyrighted code, and also asked for all profits that Cisco received "from its unlawful acts."