Re: Tom Tom and Microsofts Linux patent lock-down ..

[Rjack]

Hyman Rosen wrote:
> amicus_curious wrote:
> > The purpose of the open source license is to encourage more 
> > people to use Linux
>
> Linux is not distributed under "the open source license". It is 
> distributed under GPLv2. The purpose of GPLv2 is not to encourage
>  more people to use Linux, it is to make sure that people who get
>  the software are able to run, read, modify, and share the 
> software they receive.

The purpose of the GPLv2 is to destroy proprietary software. GPLv2
creator Richard Stallman *openly* brags about this socialist goal as
does his chief enforcer Eben Moglen.

How is it you know the purpose of others creations better than the
creators? Are you mooooooooooooooooooooooving the goal(posts)?

> You appear to have the GPL mixed up with some other license.
You appear to have reality mixed up with fantasy.
> You may not like or agree with the goals of the GPL, but you may 
> not attribute false goals to it and then claim that actions taken
> to promote the true goals are a problem because they hinder the
> false ones.
>
> > Well the court filings are a better source.  Apparently the 
> > SFLC received nothing from Verizon and there was nothing in any
> >  settlement for the courts to monitor as per the usual 
> > practice.
>
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Settlement_(litigation)> In other 
> situations (as where the claims have been satisfied by the 
> payment of a certain sum of money) the plaintiff and defendant 
> can simply file a notice that the case has been dismissed.
>
> You cannot know, not being a party, whether the SFLC received 
> anything from Verizon.

There weeeeeeeeeeeeeent the goalposts. Neither can you know since
you are not a party either.

> The only thing we can see from the outside is that for each case
>  brought by the SFLC, the defendants have made GPLed sources 
> properly available.

How is it you know better what the SFLC what they wish from their
lawsuits? We can clearly read the relief requested by the SFLC in
their frivolous complaints in THEIR own words. People can read
what the SFLC requested and compare it with that which you *assert*
the SFLC requested.

Your lame attempts to moooooooooooooooove the goalposts are
immediately recognizable as such.

> > The SFLC tries to save face, but they just look silly to the 
> > world.
>
> The SFLC is accomplishing exactly what their clients want, which
>  is enforcement of the GPL.

The SFLC is milking the congregation with brilliant efficiency.

> They do not look silly, they look successful.

So did Bernie Madoff. Look where he's sitting.

Sincerely,
Rjack :)