Re: SFLC's GPL court enforcement -- "A telling admission" by AaronWilliamson (AW1337)

[Alexander Terekhov]

Hyman Rosen wrote:
> 
> rjack wrote:
> > The S.F.L.C. attorneys are *consistent* and we may *always*
>  > count on them. They have filed six consecutive incompetent
> > pleadings in the Southern District of New York.
> 
> In any of these cases, is there an instance where the
> source code of the GPLed software was not available
> once the case was over? If not, then the SFLC has done
> its work successfully.

None of those mirrors of out-dated busybox and other GPL'd source code
that nobody really cares about comply with the FSF/SFLC view on
"complete corresponding source code" regarding "Infringing Products"
being made available by defendants. Furthermore, SFLC had to dismiss
WITH PREJUDICE (Verizon must have threatened sanctions unless they
dismiss their moronic complaint WITH PREJUDICE) without Verizon making
any source code available in spite of making available GPL'd binary code
for downloading FROM ITS OWN HOST (without any browser redirection).

regards,
alexander.

--
http://gng.z505.com/index.htm
(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.)