Jacobsen v. Katzer Case Brief
Complete case briefs with LSD+
Every LSD.Law brief pairs a full IRAC analysis with opinion summaries at three levels of depth, written by a team of Harvard Law and MIT graduates - a quick synopsis when you are pressed for time, the complete reasoning when you need to go deep.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A developer licensed his code for free under an open-source license requiring attribution. When a company used the code without attribution, the court held this violated a condition of the license, constituting copyright infringement, not just a contract breach.
Legal Significance: Established that conditions in open-source licenses are enforceable under copyright law. A violation of such conditions can constitute copyright infringement, entitling the licensor to injunctive relief even where no monetary fee is charged for the license.
Jacobsen v. Katzer Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Robert Jacobsen (Plaintiff), a software developer, created a program for model railroad hobbyists called DecoderPro. He made the software publicly available at no charge under the Artistic License, a type of open-source license. The license permitted anyone to copy, modify, and distribute the software code, but it imposed specific conditions. These conditions required any user who distributed a modified version to include attribution to the original author, retain copyright notices, and clearly document how the code was changed from the original. Matthew Katzer and Kamind Associates, Inc. (Defendants) used portions of Jacobsen’s code in their own commercial software product. However, Defendants failed to comply with the Artistic License’s conditions, omitting the required attribution, copyright notices, and descriptions of their modifications. Jacobsen sued for copyright infringement and moved for a preliminary injunction. The district court denied the injunction, reasoning that the license terms were merely contractual covenants, not conditions of the copyright grant. Thus, it held that Jacobsen’s only remedy was for breach of contract, which does not carry a presumption of irreparable harm.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does the violation of attribution and modification-tracking terms in an open-source public copyright license constitute copyright infringement or merely a breach of contract?
The court held that the terms of the Artistic License are enforceable Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sin
IRAC Legal Analysis
About IRAC analysis
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the structure professors expect in exam answers. Each LSD.Law brief states the issue, the governing rule with citations, the court's application of that rule, and the conclusion - the same reasoning pattern you will use on exams and in practice.
Legal Issue
Does the violation of attribution and modification-tracking terms in an open-source public copyright license constitute copyright infringement or merely a breach of contract?
Conclusion
This landmark decision validates the open-source licensing model by affirming that its Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris ni
Legal Rule
When a copyright license is limited in scope by clear conditions, a Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident
Legal Analysis
The Federal Circuit, applying Ninth Circuit law, reversed the district court's finding Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- Violation of open-source license terms (e.g., attribution, modification tracking) can constitute