Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

[David Kastrup]

Rjack <user@example.net> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote:
>
>> Also there is no "evasion of an interpretation of the GPL" since
>> the GPL is not even under dispute.  It would only be under
>> dispute if the defendants claimed compliance as a defense.  The
>> cases up to now have been cut&dry sufficiently for that not to be
>> a viable option.
>>
>> So even if the SFLC carried on, they'd get an interpretation of
>> the validity of copyright law in general rather than of the GPL.
>> Nothing interesting in that.
>>
>
> Would the GPL be construed as a contract and interpreted under state
> law?

Do you even read what you are replying to?  If the defendant does not
claim compliance, the GPL is not relevant to the case.

-- 
David Kastrup