Re: [News] SFLC Responds to Copyright Misconceptions, Presents Moglen Talk

[RJack]

David Kastrup wrote:
> RJack <user@example.net> writes:
>
> > Hyman Rosen wrote:
> > > On 2/10/2010 10:08 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > > > At some point, the New York bar will have no choice but to 
> > > > disbar the entire gang of utterly incompetent GNU arch legal 
> > > > beagles from SFLC for consistent filing of frivolous lawsuits 
> > > > such as 
> > > > http://www.softwarefreedom.org/news/2009/dec/14/busybox-gpl-lawsuit/
> > > >  in which (1) "the Software Freedom Conservancy" is utterly 
> > > > frivolous 'plaintiff' because it doesn't own ANY busybox 
> > > > copyrights and (2) Erik Andersen is also utterly frivolous 
> > > > 'plaintiff' because he was NOT joined by Bruce Perens and other
> > > >  contributors to the joint work known as busybox at 
> > > > http://busybox.net/.
> > > The SFLC has had successful outcomes in every single case that it
> > >  has filed - all defendants have come into compliance with the 
> > > GPL. No defendant has chosen to fight the plaintiffs.
> > The plaintiffs chose to file automatic involuntary dismissals 
> > before
>
> What's "automatic" and "involuntary" about dismissals that are filed
>  after settling?
>
> > any judge could ever read their frivolous Complaints. Why why would
> >  a plaintiff answer a Complaint that has been dismissed?
>
> Why would a defendant make the GPLed sources available in the course 
> of a settlement?

If the full force and credibility of your arguments turn on others
hurried typographical errors, you've got even bigger problems than I
first imagined. Retreat to that tactic implies an utterly desperate lack
of serious intellect.

"The Captain's scared them out of the water!"
http://www.fini.tv/blog/finishing_line_files/a44f9390355368f87dc47b7ec094f93e-36.php

ROFL. ROFL. ROFL.

Sincerely,
RJack :)