[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Cisco v FSF dismissed

From: amicus_curious
Subject: Re: Cisco v FSF dismissed
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 10:10:49 -0400

"DFS" <> wrote in message news:V%OHl.32331$
Rjack wrote:

FSF runs from another opportunity to prove legal enforceability claims
for the GPL. Just as I predicted. Listen for the Freetard spin.

The Cisco v. Free Software case was dismissed with prejudice and
without award of court costs. (On PACER court record 4/22/2009)

Rjack :)

The "Free" software bozos requested "the Court order Defendant to account for and disgorge to Plaintiff all profits derived by Defendant from its unlawful acts;"

LMAO! They sure do sound greedy for a not-for-profit, tax-exampt public charity.

That may be the very reason that they dismissed the action (with prejudice). They dismissed the Verizon action the same way when they discovered that one of Verizon's suppliers was publishing the GPL source, and all they were really after is having someone, anyone actually, toe the line. Here all they wanted was for Cisco to toe the line, too, but you seem to have uncovered an issue that would have violated their basic principles, so they must have felt it necessary to withdraw. That is probably what they will claim, anyway.

It should be unlawful to dump crappy open source code on the market for less than the cost to produce it.

It is, if you modify your statement to "reproduce" rather than produce. It is even unlawful to do that with non-crappy software, but the incremental cost of reproduction, particularly if it is just available for download, is essentially zero and not likely to evoke much of a fine.

reply via email to

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