Re: SFLC's GPL court enforcement -- track record

[David Kastrup]

rjack <danw6144@insightbb.com> writes:

> Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
>> On 2007-12-08, Bruce Lewis <brlspam@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> The GPL's track record has been and continues to be 100% enforceable.
>>
>> I've never seen a US case involving the GPL come to a verdict. Of
>> course there are the German cases, but given the different legal
>> system you can hardly compare the outcome there to the USA.
>
> U.S. Federal Courts are very sensitive to legal standing issues
> concerning "case and controversy" under Article III of the
> Constitution:

[...]

> The district court is apt to dismiss the GPL claims sua sponte when it
> realizes the plaintiffs are claiming injury for rights belonging not
> to the plaintiffs but "all third parties".
>
> It is a matter of great embarrassment to a district judge for an
> appeals court to rule that the district court had no business hearing
> the case in the first place.  :)

And that's the reason for the bigwig defendant lawyers to rather fold
than get the case heard in a court that would likely dismiss it?

Are you sure you know what you are trying to argue for?

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum