Re: SFLC stipulated dismissal of Comtrend without any settlement

[RJack]

Hyman Rosen wrote:
> On 4/12/2010 7:55 PM, RJack wrote:
> > Title 17 USC § 301
>
> Preemption of state laws equivalent to copyright is irrelevant to the
>  GPL, which is a copyright license authorizing others to practice 
> some of the exclusive rights of the copyright holders, as per federal
>  copyright law.
> > So... I'll ask the question once more. Where is the link to 
> > "BusyBox 0.60.3" which was registered and claimed in the SFLC 
> > lawsuit as the infringed work?
>
> The SFLC lawsuit does not claim that BusyBox 0.60.3 is the infringed 
> work, as can easily be seen by reading the complaint, 
> <http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2009/busybox-complaint-2009-12-14.pdf>.
>  The defendants are required to make available the version of the 
> BusyBox source code used to create the binary which they are copying
>  and distributing, not the source to BusyBox 0.60.3.

The SFLC lawsuit claims that BusyBox 0.60.3 is the infringed work, as
can easily be seen by reading the complaint,
<http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2009/busybox-complaint-2009-12-14.pdf>.

The plaintiffs are required to make available with specificity (i.e.
non-moving target) the registered version (v. 0.60.3) of the BusyBox
source code used to create the binary which they allege is copied and
distributed, not the source code to some other BusyBox version.

Sincerely,
RJasck :)