Randal pointed you toward my post on use.Perl, but don't think you read it based on your comment to him. Here's a shortened form:

Actually, the Artistic License is not being attacked. No one is attacking it. In fact, the court has upheld it so far. People are getting worried, however; the plaintiff made a copyright infringement claim citing the Artistic License, and it looks like the court ruled correctly that there can be no infringement when you give everyone the same right to copy. That is, the defendant has the right to copy, so he cannot infringe on or damage anyone else's right to copy. That's a claim unrelated to what the defendant has actually done, though, and the remaining claims about patent fraud.

The plaintiff did not bring a claim to ask the court to enforce the Artistic License, and as such the court cannot rule on that.

So far, this shouldn't have any problems with Perl. The court ruled on the claim in a way consistent with the intent of the Artistic License, saying that it gives everyone the right to copy. That's the point. Beyond that, the court has no claims on which it can rule, so it has nothing else to say about the Artistic License.