[Linux-aus] [Fwd: [LACTTE] Grant Proposal: Feasibility Report for Customer-Enforced Licence Compliance]

[Arjen Lentz]

Hi Melissa, all

----- "Melissa Draper" <melissa at meldraweb.com> wrote:
> Forwarded (with permission) for discussion as per the grants policy
> at http://linux.org.au/projects/grants/

Interesting!
If it was any other person proposing, I'd be extremely sceptical - but seeing it's Brendan... the dude knows his stuff. So I'm presuming the objective is potentially attainable, and thus the research worth doing. Cool!


> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> From: Brendan Scott <lists at opensourcelaw.biz>
> To: committee at linux.org.au
> Subject: [LACTTE] Grant Proposal: Feasibility Report for
> Customer-Enforced Licence Compliance
> Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 12:10:45 +1100
> 
> Request for Grant under the Linux Australia Grants Program
> 
> **** Date: 16 November 2009
> 
> **** Project Name: 
> Feasibility Report for Customer-Enforced Licence Compliance
> 
> 
> **** Aim of the Project:
> Historically open source compliance involves bringing, or threatening
> to bring, court action in copyright to enforce the licence terms. 
> This approach has a number of problems:
> * only a copyright holder (or exclusive licensee) can bring a
> copyright action;
> * court cases involve non-trivial filing costs; 
> * court cases often require specialist (and expensive) legal advice;  
> 
> * commencing litigation brings with it the risk of being exposed to
> the legal costs incurred by the defendant in the event the action is
> unsuccessful.
> 
> I propose to investigate the feasibility of initiating
> enforcement/compliance action through consumer legislation.  If
> compliance is feasible through the consumer legislation it will have
> the following benefits:
> * very wide concept of standing (eg any purchaser can bring an action,
> even if they are not copyright holder and, in some cases, even
> non-purchasers)
> * initially there is an administrative procedure to pursue enforcement
> (lowering enforcement costs and insulating the initiator against
> defendant's legal costs)
> * consumer protection bodies may assist in enforcement (lowering
> enforcement costs)
>  
> This would primarily involve reviewing the Trade Practices Act and, if
> relevant, related cases for requirements under Part V (relating to
> misleading and deceptive conduct) and Part VB (relating to implied
> warranties) to determine whether non-compliant vendors can be argued
> to be in breach of the Act. 
> 
> 
> Output
> The output of the work would be a report on the review and an
> explanation of the feasibility of such an approach. 
> The report may be licensed openly (eg GPLv3) and would be drafted
> accordingly (this may mean that the report would be more circumspect
> than if it was not published openly). 
> 
>  
> Milestones:
> Report to be produced by 31 January 2010 if approved before start of
> December 09, 14 February if approved in December 09, otherwise within
> 4-6 weeks of grant approval.  
> 
> 
> **** Person Responsible for Request:
> Brendan Scott
> 
> **** Request:
> Grant amount: $3,000
> 
> My Contribution: Costing for this project includes 1:1 contribution of
> my time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> committee mailing list
> committee at lists.linux.org.au
> http://lists.linux.org.au/listinfo/committee
> 
> 
> -- 
> Melissa Draper
> 
> w: http://meldraweb.com & http://geekosophical.net
> p: +61 4 0472 2736
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-aus mailing list
> linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au
> http://lists.linux.org.au/listinfo/linux-aus

-- 
Arjen Lentz, Exec.Director @ Open Query (http://openquery.com)
Exceptional Services for MySQL at a fixed budget.

Follow our blog at http://openquery.com/blog/
OurDelta: packages for MySQL and MariaDB @ http://ourdelta.org