Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com> writes:
Rjack wrote:
The BusyBox suits are over. Get over spinning the
hypothetical settlements.
After each case was settled, the defendants or their agents
made the source code properly available under the GPL.
Move on to creating explanations to justify the SFLC's
evasion of an interpretation of the GPL on its merits in the
upcoming expected voluntary dismissal in the Cisco case.
The explanation is that once the parties reach agreement on a
settlement, the case is dismissed. Courts do not hold trials
when the parties no longer have a dispute.
Also there is no "evasion of an interpretation of the GPL" since
the GPL is not even under dispute. It would only be under
dispute if the defendants claimed compliance as a defense. The
cases up to now have been cut&dry sufficiently for that not to be
a viable option.
So even if the SFLC carried on, they'd get an interpretation of
the validity of copyright law in general rather than of the GPL.
Nothing interesting in that.