ARTISTIC LICENCE SOFTWARE LICENSE

However, this left undisturbed the finding that a free and open-source license nonetheless has economic value. The case was remanded to the District Court, which did not apply the superior court's criteria on the grounds that, in the interim, the governing Supreme Court precedent applicable to the case had changed. On appeal, a federal appellate court 'determined that the terms of the Artistic License are enforceable copyright conditions'. Katzer in the initial 2009 ruling by the United States District Court for the Northern District of California declared that FOSS-like licenses could only be enforced through contract law rather than through copyright law, in contexts where contract damages would be difficult to establish. The terms of the Artistic License 1.0 were at issue in Jacobsen v. It is used by the Paros Proxy, the JavaFBP toolkit and NcFTP. This was released as the Clarified Artistic License and was approved by the FSF. In response to this, Bradley Kuhn, who later worked for the Free Software Foundation, made a minimal redraft to clarify the ambiguous passages. The FSF recommended that the license not be used on its own, but approved the common AL/GPL dual-licensing approach for Perl projects.

The Free Software Foundation explicitly called the original Artistic License a non-free license, criticizing it as being 'too vague some passages are too clever for their own good, and their meaning is not clear'.

ARTISTIC LICENCE SOFTWARE LICENSE

Whether or not the original Artistic License is a free software license is largely unsettled. The name of the license is a reference to the concept of artistic license. The original Artistic License was written by Larry Wall.

Artistic licence