Re: SFLC's GPL court enforcement -- track record

[Moshe Goldfarb.]

On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 12:45:59 -0700, Tim Smith wrote:

> In article <aHJgk.1205$ue.831@fe089.usenetserver.com>,
>  Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com> wrote:
>> The SFLC continues to file cases on behalf of their clients,
>> who can therefore be assumed to be satisfied with the service
>> they are receiving.
> 
> What's puzzling is that rjack appears to be right about one very 
> important thing, though.  Doing a search of copyright registrations, I 
> can't find one for Busybox (or for anything else by the people listed in 
> the lawsuits as the copyright owners).
> 
> It also doesn't appear the Busybox counts as a non-US Berne work, and so 
> registration is a prerequisite to suit.
> 
> Can anyone explain what is going on here?  Is the search at 
> www.copyright.gov not up to date?  Are the defendants not bothering to 
> check because they just assume the work must have been registered?  Is 
> Busybox actually a non-US Berne work?

I'm surprised Fisher Price hasn't squawked about the name.
Their's is Busy Box (2 words) though I think?

-- 
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/