Alexander Terekhov wrote:
rjack wrote:
[...]
property sharing. At that point it's Federal Court lawsuit time.
Before you launch your product set aside sufficient money for
attorney fees to defend against his silly-assed ideologically
based claims.
Just FYI: Katzen et al. managed to get some fees back:
"the Court hereby GRANTS Defendants’ motions to dismiss, DENIES
Defendants’ motion to bifurcate without prejudice, GRANTS
Defendants’ special motions to strike, and AWARDS attorneys’ fees
in the amount of $14,486.68 for Defendants Katzer and KAM and
$16,976.25 for Defendant Russell."
http://jmri.sourceforge.net/k/docket/111.pdf
regards,
alexander.
--
"Because of their informal and diffuse nature, open source groups are
vulnerable to theft of their intellectual property. That theft, in the
form of copyright infringement, happened in this case, and Jacobsen
sought a preliminary injunction to enjoin Katzer and KAMIND's
infringement."
-- BRIEF OF ROBERT G. JACOBSEN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, CAFC 2008-1
In the BusyBox suit against Verizon, plaintiffs Anderson and
Landley could easily cough up $50,000 - $150,000 or more for
Verizon's attorney fees just for preliminary motions.
If Verizon's attorneys drag out the suit by filing a formal
Answer to Complaint and begin discovery in lieu of a simple Rule
12 Motion to Dismiss, they can really run up the attorney fee
hours. The plaintiffs have no legal standing to complain about
"all third parties" not receiving source code. You can bet
Verizon's attorneys know that fact -- so burn up the hours --
that's often how the game is played when the prevailing party is
awarded attorney fees (as in copyright infringement actions).
Regards,
Rjack :)
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
