Re: The GPL means what you want it to mean

[Rahul Dhesi]

Rjack <user@example.net> writes:

>Present a rational, logical argument supported by legal authority and
>have at it. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with disagreeing with
>a court when relying on alternate but conflicting legal authority.

The CAFC panel, comprising three smart people, already unanimously
provided you with a rational, logical argument supported by legal
authority. If that doesn't satisfy you, nothing will.

The JMRI case may soon be heard again by the Ninth Circuit. If so, the
Ninth Circuit will surely uphold the possibility of an injunction
against those who misappropriate copyrighted software.  And I predict
that that won't satisfy you either.

Rjack and Wallace quote a lot of case law fragments, but seem to not
consider the point that the law is, in the end, all about dispensing
justice.  Denying a copyright owner any recourse against those who
misappropriate his software would be an injustice. And generally the
courts tend to lean against that. This simple fact explains why the CAFC
ruled the way it did. At the end of the day, it's mostly about keeping
things fair.
-- 
Rahul
http://rahul.rahul.net/