[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Tom Tom and Microsofts Linux patent lock-down ..

From: Rjack
Subject: Re: Tom Tom and Microsofts Linux patent lock-down ..
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 09:29:09 -0400
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20081209)

amicus_curious wrote:

"Rahul Dhesi" <> wrote in
message news:gpmeri$f3k$
"amicus_curious" <> writes:

What is kind of interesting here is that the GPL purists,
notably SJVN, a Linux blogger of note, is insisting that
TomTom be barred from making any kind of patent deal with Mr.

Welcome to the workings of the adversary system of justice.
Maybe this is the first time you are being exposed to it.
Here's how it works.

The copyright owner, and those cheering for the copyright
owner, will ask for the earth and the moon and an injunction
prohibiting any further copying. Sometimes the injunction is
granted. You might recall the famous case, in which the
RIAA and its members essentially wiped out a
half-billion-dollar company overnight with an injunction.

The defendant, on the other hand, and those cheering for it
(typically including you and Rjack :-) may make pious claims
and act hurt like wounded puppies (we are shocked, shocked!)
and may argue that there is no infringement at all.  Or even
that there is no valid copyright at all, like what JMRI argued.

What will really happen? We don't know yet. The only thing we
can be sure about is that there will be a lot of posturing from
both sides.

Often, there is a settlement which gives something to each

However, so far as I know, none of the Linux kernel copyright
holders has yet sued Tom-Tom, and we don't know that there even
will be such a lawsuit. So you can wait for the game to start
before you start cheering for your side. --
You seem to be an answer in search of a question here.  I don't
see where anything I posted has anything to do with what you
replied.  I am not cheering for anyone here.

If someone has no basis in reality for their argument, they can
always resort to ad hominem attacks. It doesn't convince anyone but
it's very cathartic when you're on the losing end of things..

I just think that it is interesting that the GPL advocates are
calling for the heads of anyone who may have capitulated to the
patent claims being asserted by Microsoft in regard to the FAT
file design.  Realistically there does not seem to be any way to
use FAT files without using (and infringing upon) the FAT design.

On the other hand, there doesn't seem to be anybody with standing
 interested in suing GPL users for licensing the FAT patents as a
defense against Microsoft suits.  Is the Linux code even
registered for copyright?  I could not find it.  Torvalds has
registered the trademark, I know, but what about the code?  Who
could actually sue on this issue?

reply via email to

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