[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: CAFC took JMRI case under advisement

From: Alexander Terekhov
Subject: Re: CAFC took JMRI case under advisement
Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 13:08:01 +0200

Hyman Rosen wrote:
> Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > Hyman Rosen wrote:
> >> I still fail to understand what you find shocking
> >> about the citation of Nimmer.
> >
> > Go and drop am email to Nimmer et. al. asking whether a copyright
> > license is a contract or not. Let us know about his response.
> No, I don't think I will.
> People quote all sorts of stuff in lawsuits. In the case of this
> brief, it claims that a license is sufficiently like a contract
> that you can make similar claims for infringement.
> Here's an idea - why don't you go ahead and willfully defy the
> GPL on some piece of code, get yourself sued, and see how it all
> works out.

We all know how it works out.

1. Ignoring jurisdictional requirement SFLC files a complaint
(warranting atomatic dismissal).

2. Shortly thereafter SFLC moves to dismiss the case WITH PREJUDICE
against own clients (without any stipulation of settlement).

3. A face-saving press release appears claiming a "settlement" with
NON-DEFENDANT third party.

4. Defendant continues wilfully defy the GPL (from now on with impunity
due to res judicata since the case was dismissed WITH PREJUDICE against


(GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can
be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards
too, whereas GNU cannot.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]