Re: Pee Jay says silence is golden

[Alan Mackenzie]

In gnu.misc.discuss RJack <user@example.net> wrote:
> Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>> In gnu.misc.discuss RJack <user@example.net> wrote:
>>> Alan Mackenzie wrote:

>> We shall see, in the fullness of time.  However, it's not a
>> fraudulent claim.  It would appear that busybox's copyright has been
>> violated, and Erik Andersen is a copyright holder. Huh????

>> If a case is dismissed on a technicality, that isn't fraud.

> Nice try Alan. The "technicality" to which you speak is the United
> States Copyright Act, Title 17 USC. This is the same tactic taken by
> your anarchist mentors like RMS and Eben Moglen -- if it doesn't fit
> your philosophy then it's just a legal "technicality".

Look, let's just wait and see, OK?  You don't know the full particulars
of this case any more than I do.  And you reckon your understanding of
USA copyright law exceeds Eben Moglen's, do you?  If so, on what basis?

>> Further speculation seems pointless.

> Ye Gads, Alan! Thank you, thank you. Admitting that what you are
> claiming is SPECULATION is a first step towards atonement and spiritual
> enlightenment!!!.

I reckon you're doing the speculating.  You're also very unsure of
yourself, otherwise you wouldn't be making such a song and dance about
it.  I've said what my prediction is.  You've said what yours is, namely
Erik Andersen and the SFLC will get blown out of court due to a
"fraudulent" claim and find themselves having to pay the bills of 14
companies' lawyers.

We shall see.

> Sincerely,
> RJack

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).