David Kastrup wrote: [...] > You did not answer the question. Really? Oh dear. How about this:
http://www.fsf.org/news/wallace-vs-fsf ----- The GPL tested in US courts - Wallace Vs FSF. * Send this page to somebody * Print this page The GNU General Public License stands firm. On Monday March 20, 2006 US Federal Judge John Daniel Tinder, dismissed the Sherman Act antitrust claims brought against the Free Software Foundation. The claims made by Plaintiff Daniel Wallace included: that the General Public License (GPL) constituted a contract, combination or conspiracy; that it created an unreasonable restraint of trade; and that the FSF conspired with IBM, Red Hat Inc., Novell and other individuals to pool and cross-license their copyrighted intellectual property in a predatory price fixing scheme. Peter Brown, FSF Executive Director, responded to the news, "As the author of the GPL and copyright holder on the largest body of GPL'd covered free software, the FSF hears many theories of potential legal claims and challenges to the GPL. We hear the fear, uncertainty and doubt (FUD) expressed, that the GPL has never been tested in court, and that somehow that is a sign of its weakness. Nothing could be further from the truth of course. Put quite simply, if you don't accept the terms of the GPL, then you have no rights to the copyrighted works it covers. What is there left to test? The GPL is a software license, it is not a contract. It gives permissions from the copyright holder. You don't want to accept those permissions? End of discussion." On Monday, a US Federal Court Judge dismissed Daniel Wallace's case saying "[The GPL] acts as a means by which certain software may be copied, modified and redistributed without violating the software's copyright protection. As such, the GPL encourages, rather than discourages, free competition and the distribution of computer operating systems, the benefits of which directly pass to consumers. These benefits include lower prices, better access and more innovation." Brown continued, "Let us all stop and consider the consequences of what this US Federal Judge has said. On being presented with the facts surrounding the GPL, he was able to define a range of benefits available to those that value the freedoms delivered by the GPL. The question we are all left with is, why would anyone put up with the inferred consequences of proprietary software?", and, "If you care about lower prices, better access to software, or more innovation, then GPL'd software is for you. Or as the Free Software would describe that, you value freedom". Having dismissed the case, and finding in favor of the FSF and against Wallace, the Judge also allowed FSF costs against Wallace. Wallace now has thirty days to appeal the decision, but the FSF expects no further meaningful news on the matter. About the Free Software Foundation The Free Software Foundation, founded in 1985, is dedicated to promoting computer users' right to use, study, copy, modify, and redistribute computer programs. The FSF promotes the development and use of free (as in freedom) software - particularly the GNU operating system and its GNU/Linux variants - and free documentation for free software. The FSF also helps to spread awareness of the ethical and political issues of freedom in the use of software. Their Web site, located at www.fsf.org , is an important source of information about GNU/Linux. Donations to support their work can be made at http://donate.fsf.org. Their headquarters are in Boston, MA, USA. ----- Oh poor Judge Tinger. Now, in the mean time... on pacer: ----- Case 1:05-cv-00678-RLY-VSS Document 58-1 Filed 03/22/2006 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION DANIEL WALLACE, Plaintiff, v. INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION, RED HAT, INC., and NOVELL, INC., Defendants. Cause No. 1:05-cv-678-SEB-VSS SUBMISSION OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY IN SUPPORT OF REASSERTED MOTION TO DISMISS Defendants, Red Hat, Inc. ("Red Hat"), and Novell, Inc. ("Novell"), submit the attached Entry Granting Reasserted Motion to Dismiss, entered in Wallace v. Free Software Foundation, Inc., Cause No. 1:05-cv-0618-JDT-TAB (S.D. Ind. Mar. 20, 2006), attached as Exhibit 1, as supplemental authority in support of their pending Reasserted Motion to Dismiss in this action. Respectfully submitted, Philip A. Whistler (#1205-49) Curtis W. McCauley (#16456-49) Attorneys for Defendants Red Hat, Inc., and Novell, Inc. ICE MILLER One American Square Box 82001 Indianapolis, IN 46282-0002 317.236.2100 Case 1:05-cv-00678-RLY-VSS Document 58-1 Filed 03/22/2006 Page 2 of 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that on the 22d day of March 2006, a copy of the foregoing was filed electronically. Notice of this filing will be sent to the following parties by operation of the Court's electronic filing system. Parties may access this filing through the Court's system. Michael Gottschlich BARNES & THORNBURG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kendall H. Millard BARNES & THORNBURG [EMAIL PROTECTED] The undersigned hereby certifies that on the 22d day of March 2006, a copy of the foregoing has been deposited in the U.S. mail, first class postage prepaid, addressed to: Daniel Wallace P.O. Box 572 New Palestine, IN 46163 Curtis W. McCauley ICE MILLER One American Square Box 82001 Indianapolis, IN 46282-0002 317.236.2100 ----- If I were Wallace I'd probably submit this press release http://www.fsf.org/news/wallace-vs-fsf as kinda counter supplemental "authority" in opposition to motion to dismiss to Judge Young. ;-) Would be fun regarding Barnes & Thornburg LLP's thoughts on contract status of the GPL (vs FSF's/Moglen's idiotic theory reiterated in the press release) to begin with. Oh, and I'd probably include the GNU Manifesto as well... www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.html "GNU will remove operating system software from the realm of competition. You will not be able to get an edge in this area, but neither will your competitors be able to get an edge over you. You and they will compete in other areas, while benefiting mutually in this one. If your business is selling an operating system, you will not like GNU, but that's tough on you. If your business is something else, GNU can save you from being pushed into the expensive business of selling operating systems." regards, alexander. _______________________________________________ Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
