Search for: "JACOBSEN V KATZER"
Results 1 - 20
of 70
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Aug 2022, 7:11 am
(see Jacobsen v. [read post]
10 Feb 2020, 8:57 am
These sound like business decisions: promotional value v. backlash. [read post]
1 Aug 2017, 5:52 am
The main ruling dealing with the contract/licence dichotomy came in the US decision of Jacobsen v Katzer, where the 9th Circuit had to decide on this very legal question for the purpose of declaring the validity of the Artistic License, an open source software licence. [read post]
1 Aug 2017, 5:52 am
The main decision dealing with the contract/licence dichotomy came in the US decision of Jacobsen v Katzer, where the 9th Circuit had to decide on this very legal question for the purpose of declaring the validity of the Artistic License, an open source software licence. [read post]
20 Nov 2015, 2:30 am
NOTAS (1) Jacobsen v. [read post]
24 Oct 2015, 4:52 am
The judge dismissed outright the claim of copyright infringement citing the landmark decision of Jacobsen v. [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 9:00 am
Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 (Fed. [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 1:17 pm
Katzer can be used to interpret the terms of open-source licenses, including the GPL v.2, GPL v.3, Apache License v.2, BSD License, and the Mozilla Public License. [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 1:17 pm
Katzer can be used to interpret the terms of open-source licenses, including the GPL v.2, GPL v.3, Apache License v.2, BSD License, and the Mozilla Public License. [read post]
26 Apr 2011, 7:13 am
Jacobsen v. [read post]
3 Jan 2011, 1:28 pm
In Jacobsen v. [read post]
21 Dec 2010, 9:41 am
One big question this raises is how this squares with Jacobsen v. [read post]
11 Aug 2010, 7:19 pm
Strauss Notes CPR: How Jacobsen v. [read post]
5 Aug 2010, 11:32 am
For example, in Jacobsen v. [read post]
9 Jul 2010, 11:32 am
Jacobsen v Katzer, now settled), or the EULA issues raised in MDY v Blizzard and the issues highlighted through Amazon’s Orwellian mess. [read post]
29 May 2010, 8:41 pm
Session V (Infringement Exemptions, Fair Use, and Exhaustion) Patent Act §287(c)(1): methods of surgery are patentable, but not enforceable against doctors, helping personnel, or institutions in which they’re done—Dan Burk says it’s a complicated and unclear provision. [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 5:04 pm
" Contracts * Jacobsen v. [read post]
22 Feb 2010, 8:34 am
The case of Jacobsen v. [read post]
19 Feb 2010, 1:19 am
A very broad injunction prohibiting Katzer from reproducing, modifying or distributing “JMRI Materials” as well as prohibiting Katzer from registering certain trademarks and domain names. [read post]
1 Feb 2010, 5:51 am
Katzer) In Jacobsen v. [read post]
