Re: The SFLC dismissals should be coming soon

[David Kastrup]

RJack <user@example.net> writes:

> SFLC voluntary dismissals should be coming soon in Best Buy et. al.
> case.

Once the defendants have agreed to come into compliance and pay the
incurred costs, that's the usual course.  Do you have any information
pertaining to that?

> The SFLC cannot risk a judge actually interpreting the GPL license.

It is quite unlikely that a judge will have to take a look at the GPL
unless the defendant states that he has accepted it.  But with such a
statement, compliance and settlement is the sanest course to cut further
legal costs.  And without such a statement, there is no point for a
judge to look at the GPL.

> The court would read the covenants in the GPL contract which Eben
> Moglen claims are "conditions" and quickly file the license in the
> court's little round filing bin -- if he didn't die laughing first.

Sure, if the conditions are not met (and no attempt to do so is claimed
by the defendant), the license does not apply and can be filed in the
bin: the resulting plain case of copyright violation without a license
is no longer about the GPL.

> Another frivolous lawsuit to which the SFLC can spin:

A world in which a lawsuit for copying without license is frivolous
would certainly be to the liking of the FSF.

But it's not ours.

> Sincerely,

Hardly.

-- 
David Kastrup