Re: Fw: [FSF] FSF Settles Suit Against Cisco

[Alan Mackenzie]

Rjack <user@example.net> wrote:
> Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>> John Hasler <john@dhh.gt.org> wrote:
>>> Alan Mackenzie writes:
>>>> This news is particularly welcome here, since it makes it that 
>>>> much harder for those with unconventional modes of thinking to 
>>>> distort the reality in the mailing list.

>>> You would think so, wouldn't you?  Soon enough we'll be told that
>>>  the judge was drunk or some such nonsense.

>> Look's like I was wrong, for once.  It took Rjack "I won't admit to
>>  being a lawyer" sadly little time to post what he would have liked
>>  to happen as though it had actually happened.


> Ahhhh... What actually happened? Were you a neutral witness to the
> "settlement agreement" between Cisco and FSF? Perhaps you have read a
> signed and docketed copy of the settlement agreement?

Yes, Mr. "I won't admit to being a lawyer".  If it makes you happier,
I was there in person, talked to the active participants on both sides,
and did indeed read through the settlement agreement.  There was a
considerable degree of goodwill in evidence, and the summary on the FSF's
website is accurate.

[To everybody else: the above is, of course, a pork pie.]

> When there is no docketed settlement agreement and the plaintiff
> dismisses his case WITH PREDJUDICE, then you think the plaintiff is
> entitled to his unchallenged version of success?

Yes, until the other side challenges it.  I'm sure Cisco has a fully
capable public relations department, which will be fully aware of the
SFLC's press release.  It would take them at most a couple of hours to
issue their own press release countering the SFLC's.  Have a search for
that and post the URL when (or rather, if) you find it.

> Sincerely,
> Rjack :)

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).