[Top][All Lists]

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

Doogie, go to doctor and take mad Eben with you.. (was: Re: the GPL is a

From: Alexander Terekhov
Subject: Doogie, go to doctor and take mad Eben with you.. (was: Re: the GPL is a license not a contract ..)
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 12:59:47 +0100

Did you follow SCO v. IBM, Doogie?

"SCO's GPL violations entitle IBM to at least nominal damages on the
Sixth Counterclaim for breach of the GPL. See Bair v. Axiom Design LLC
20 P.3d 388, 392 (Utah 2001) (explaining that it is "well settled"
that nominal damages are recoverable upon breach of contract); Kronos,
Inc. v. AVX Corp., 612 N.E.2d 289, 292 (N.Y. 1993)  ("Nominal damages
are always available in breach of contract action".). "

Also worth noting (from IBM's brief regarding alleged SCO's GPL contract

"the Court need not reach the choice of law issue because Utah law and
New York law are in accord on the issues that must be reached to
address SCO's sole argument on this motion, namely, that SCO did not
breach the GPL. Throughout this brief, IBM cites to both Utah law and
New York law."

How come that IBM together with renowned Cravath, Swaine & Moore
disagree with mad Moglen regarding the contract nature of the GPL?

I also note that you've referred to MySQL v. Progress... here's a quote:

"COUNT VIII Breach of Contract (GPL License)"

Can you comprehend the word "contract" as in "Breach of Contract (GPL


(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]