[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

From: Rjack
Subject: Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 20:41:01 -0500
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20081209)

Rahul Dhesi wrote:
Rjack <> writes:

"A copyright is a right against the world. Contracts, by contrast, generally affect only their parties...
The GPL is a contract... As such it involves rights "in rem" that affects all persons. Congress forbid this kind of copyright control...

[ various other arguments omitted ]

Here's the big problem with all these arguments: None of the defendants seem to be making them.

Of course they don't make them! They know that a Rule 41 voluntary
dismissal by the plaintiffs will be coming in short order (check the
track record of the SFLC). So why is this a problem with my
arguments? Just because my arguments are never required doesn't make
them less than true or effective.

The SFLC will NEVER, NEVER voluntarily allow a federal judge to
interpret the GPL on its merits -- even if they must dismiss their
clients case WITH PREJUDICE.

Rjack :)

reply via email to

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