[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Pee Jay says silence is golden

From: RJack
Subject: Re: Pee Jay says silence is golden
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:33:44 -0500
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20090812)

Alan Mackenzie wrote:
In gnu.misc.discuss RJack <> wrote:
Alan Mackenzie wrote:

I suggest you email all these lawyers to point out the fraud you allege.

I am quite busy with grandkids this week but I an aware of other's efforts to do that very thing wrt the legal departments of the fourteen corporate defendants.

Hope you have a good week with the little terrors.

I suspect Erik Andersen has stepped on his weenie this time. All charades have to end eventually. It's tough to have your bluff called. Paying fourteen legal firms attorney fees because of a fraudulent copyright claim could be very expensive.

We shall see, in the fullness of time. However, it's not a fraudulent claim. It would appear that busybox's copyright has been
 violated, and Erik Andersen is a copyright holder. Huh????

Huh??? "It would appear that busybox's copyright has been violated...".

Pray tell Alan, who is this mysterious copyright owner named "busybox"?

If a case is dismissed on a technicality, that isn't fraud.

Nice try Alan. The "technicality" to which you speak is the United
States Copyright Act, Title 17 USC. This is the same tactic taken by
your anarchist mentors like RMS and Eben Moglen -- if it doesn't fit
your philosophy then it's just a legal "technicality".

However, if your view of the case were accurate, the SFLC wouldn't have Started it in the first place.

Do you mean to say that an SFLC lawsuit is infallible?
************* ROLLING ON THE FLOOR LAUGHING *******************

The SFLC filed a whole series of federal lawsuits without any legal
standing to do so. When they realized they had no standing, a fraudulent
copyright registration was filed with the Copyright Office to remedy
their obvious ignorance of copyright practice in the Second Federal
Circuit. The SFLC will NEVER let one of their frivolous suits proceed to
trial. It's all SFLC bullshit propaganda. 'Nuff said.

I suspect the usual thing will happen, there will be a settlement with each defendent involving it coming into compliance with the GPL, appointing a compliance officer, and paying an unspecified sum in damages.

Further speculation seems pointless.

Ye Gads, Alan! Thank you, thank you. Admitting that what you are
claiming is SPECULATION is a first step towards atonement and spiritual


reply via email to

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