Re: As the GPL fades

[Hyman Rosen]

On 2/5/2010 1:50 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> They "doesnt-know":
> http://blog.internetnews.com/skerner/2008/06/verizon-ceo-doesnt-know-about.html

As I've said before, everyone agrees that the GPL is
a perfectly valid copyright license, and typical
breaches are due to laziness and inattention, not
willfulness. If this case had had the attention of
someone high in the hierarchy, there would have been
no case necessary to begin with.

Verizon knows about the GPL now.

> To wit, Verizon is still blatantly breaching the GPL at
> http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp
> and the complaint about it
> http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2007/dec/07/busybox/verizon.pdf
>
> "11. Upon information and belief, Verizon distributes to its
> customers the Actiontec MI424WR wireless router (“Infringing
> Product”), which contains embedded executable software
> (“Firmware”). Defendant also provides the Firmware corresponding
> to the Infringing Product for download viaits website, at
> http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp.";
>
> was dismissed with prejudice against plaintiffs without any settlement
> -- no agreement with the defendant.

Verizon is no longer infringing the GPL, having settled
the case. They are now providing the sources here:
<http://www.verizon.net/central/vzc.portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=vzc_help_contentDisplay&objId=44481>
and shipping a manual and disk with their routers which
apprises users of their rights under the GPL. A copy of
the Verizon-branded and Verizon-copyrighted manual can
be read here:
<http://www.actiontec.com/support_cms/doc_files/MI424WR_Rev._E_User_Manual_20.8.0_v3_GPL.pdf>

It is a deliberate misstatement to say "was dismissed
with prejudice against plaintiffs". Rather, the plaintiffs
dismissed their case with prejudice once a settlement was
reached. Dismissal with prejudice is routine in settlements
to reassure defendants that plaintiffs will not attempt to
refile the case.