rjack wrote:
If the SFLC is actually settling these frivolous actions as their self-serving blog statements claim, then let them present their evidence. It's put-up or shut-up time for the SFLC. It is their burden of proof.
It's pretty simple, actually. Just demonstrate a case where someone is distributing binaries derived from GPLed code without the source being available. Terekhov will no doubt point to Verizon/Actiontec, but in that case the source is available from someone who has a business relationship with Verizon, so it would be difficult to attack Verizon on the fine details of the GPL. Can you find any example where the SFLC dropped a case and the source code for the programs in dispute was not made available? _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
