Re: The SFLC dismissals should be coming soon

[Alexander Terekhov]

David Kastrup wrote:
[...]
> >
> > What evidence do you want from me stupid dak? That
> >
> > http://www2.verizon.net/micro/actiontec/actiontec.asp
> >
> > is not backed by the "complete corresponding source code" under the GNU
> > GPL you silly?
> 
> You got the links already.

Now tell me that you really tried to visit those links (Hyman's
"Residential Help" links) and build the binaries from that 'source' you
silly dak. Did you try that?

regards,
alexander.

P.S. "I'm insufficiently motivated to go set up a GNU/Linux system 
so that I can do the builds."

Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com> The Silliest GPL 'Advocate'

P.P.S. "It is just like a suit to enforce a copyright license, which
arises under state law rather than under the Copyright Act. "

Hyman's lovin' http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Gaiman_v._McFarlane

P.P.P.S. "We do not believe that the Copyright Act permits holders of
rights under copyrights to choose third parties to bring suits on their
behalf. While F.R. Civ. P. 17(a) ordinarily permits the real party in
interest to ratify a suit brought by another party, the Copyright Law is
quite specific in stating that only the "owner of an exclusive right
under a copyright" may bring suit."

Hyman's lovin'
http://cases.justia.com/us-court-of-appeals/F3/402/881/510088/

--
http://gng.z505.com/index.htm 
(GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can 
be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards 
too, whereas GNU cannot.)