[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Psystar's legal reply brief in response to Apple

From: Hyman Rosen
Subject: Re: Psystar's legal reply brief in response to Apple
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2010 15:58:37 -0000
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv: Gecko/20100802 Thunderbird/3.1.2

On 8/9/2010 5:02 PM, RJack wrote:
"See Mother & Father v. Cassidy, 338 F.3d 704, 708 (7th Cir. 2003)
> (dismissal under Rule 41(a)(2), with prejudice, after a plaintiff
gives up makes the defendant the prevailing party)";

So what? In that exact case you cite, the dismissal was because
plaintiffs wanted to move their case to a different court, and
the defendant filed a motion to recover costs. They no more
admitted being wrong than the does the SFLC when they dismiss
because they have settled. It's just technical details of how
legal procedure works.

The case can be read here:

So you are likely correct that where the SFLC has dismissed with
prejudice the defendants are the "prevailing party" when that
matters, but it is also correct that in each such dismissal, the
defendants have made the GPLed sources properly available, which
is what the SFLC sought.

reply via email to

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