Re: "News" Verizon calls SFLC bluff

[rjack]

Alexander Terekhov wrote:

> " . . . Again, though, since the boxes involved are Actiontec's, they
> chose to take responsibility for remedying both their own and Verizon's
> past violations and ensuring compliance in the future." 

Since the dismissal was with PREJUDICE future litigation is forever 
foreclosed.

This is my favorite part of the spin, "... ensuring compliance in the 
future."

In the future Verizon and Actiontec can distribute the BusyBox code any 
way they wish since plaintiffs Andersen and Landley can't do a damn 
thing about it. . . BECAUSE THEY LOST THEIR CASE . . .

"A voluntary dismissal with prejudice operates as a final adjudication 
on the merits and has a res judicata effect." Harrison v. Edison Bros. 
Apparel Stores, Inc., 924 F.2d 530, 534 (4th Cir. 1991).

ROFL

Sincerely,
Rjack

--- "Standing doctrine embraces several judicially self-imposed limits 
on the exercise of federal jurisdiction, such as the general prohibition 
on a litigant's raising another person's legal rights, . . ."; ALLEN v. 
WRIGHT 468 U.S. 737, 751 (1984) ---