User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Midway v. Arctic International

Midway v. Arctic International

Posted Mar 30, 2009 4:20 UTC (Mon) by jeffnorman (guest, #57684)
In reply to: Midway v. Arctic International by jordanb
Parent article: OSBC: Life at the edge of the GPL

Yes but Galoob was a very narrow rationale that has very little
applicability outside gaming, and Galoob has not been followed anywhere
outside the 9th circuit (and has been subject to some pretty heavy
criticism).

Basically, the Ninth Circuit in Galoob held that an enhancement to a screen
display was not "fixed" sufficiently to constitute a derivative work. The
"fixation" requirement imposed by Galoob (literally, the "pink sunglasses
test" was used by the court to determine whether fixation occurs in the
retina) has been justly riduculed and makes very little sense.

In any case, Galoob does not apply to code, only to screen displays because
they are not fixed.


(Log in to post comments)


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds