Re: Blowhard Bradley Kuhn and his fraud

[Alexander Terekhov]

Hyman Rosen wrote:
> 
> On 8/12/2010 12:38 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > But RJack's was talking about SFC, not Erik.
> 
> So you are alleging that the lawsuit will be dismissed
> because one of the plaintiffs does not hold a copyright
> while the other does, as opposed to the RIAA lawsuit
> where each plaintiff holds some copyright but not all.

I'm alleging that SFC clearly has NO STANDING to bring a copyright claim
regarding copyright which SFC DOES NOT OWN (or to which the SFC isn't an
exclusive licensee).

"In law, standing or locus standi is the term for the ability of a party
to demonstrate to the court sufficient connection to and harm from the
law or action challenged to support that party's participation in the
case.

...

In United States law, the Supreme Court of the United States has stated,
"In essence the question of standing is whether the litigant is entitled
to have the court decide the merits of the dispute or of particular
issues.""

There are a number of requirements that a plaintiff must establish to
have standing before a federal court."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_(law)

regards,
alexander.

--
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.)