Re: SFLC stipulated dismissal of Comtrend without any settlement

[Hyman Rosen]

On 4/9/2010 3:46 PM, RJack wrote:
> Crank this Mr. Denier:
>
> "To apply the doctrine of promissory estoppel, the proponent must
> demonstrate: (1) a clear and unambiguous promise; (2) reasonable and
> foreseeable reliance by the party to whom the promise is made; and (3)
> an injury sustained in reliance on the promise (see NGR, LLC v General
> Elec. Co., 24 AD3d 425 [2005]). Estoppel requires detriment to the party
> claiming to have been misled (see Nassau Trust Co., 56 NY2d at 184).";
> New York Supreme Court, Kings County Docket No. 2009-04019

There is no estoppel with respect to the GPL since the GPL clearly
spells out the requirements for allowing covered code to be copied and
distributed. That an anti-GPL crank believes the permissions of
the GPL apply while the requirements do not simply confirms that
person as a crank, but does not impact the GPL at all.