|
|
|
|
|
|
by ovi256
3330 days ago
|
|
|
It's a very narrow ruling, conditioned on the fact that the defendant, Hancom, publicly acknowledged they were using Ghostscript under GPL. It does not say much, if anything, but IANAL, about a defendant who would not have acknowledged this, which seems like the more interesting question. Common law judges are very prudent in their ruling. |
|
|