In gnu.misc.discuss RJack <[email protected]> wrote: > Pee Jay trumpeted, "the Software Freedom Law Center has since > gone to court successfully regarding the GPL multiple times". This, > despite Eben Moglen's SFLC voluntarily dismissing the seven suits before > a federal judge could ever read a single word of any complaint.
You've been told already ad nauseam that this "voluntary dismissal" is a codeword for "settled, with the defendants having come into compliance". Your continual insinuation that the SFLC simply lost these cases is what you would refer to as "lying". > Now that the internet is buzzing with the fraudulent copyright claims of > Erik Andersen, where pray tell, is Pee Jay's analysis of the > situation? Who's stealing the code now, Pee Jay? The complaint you refer to elsewhere states that Erik Andersen is _a_ copyright holder, not _the_ copyright holder. > BLUFF and FRAUD. Pee Jay, that's what the GPL is all about. BLUFF and > FRAUD. Funny thing, though, when alleged violations of the GPL do reach the courtroom, the GPL is upheld. > You can rest assured that the fourteen defendants' legal departments in > the SFLC's current fraudulent action will want to depose Mr. Andersen > concerning his copyright "ownership" of BusyBox v. 0.60.3. Let the > games begin. I suggest you email all these lawyers to point out the fraud you allege. > The SFLC, frivolously and with the intent to harass and intimidate the > defendants, .... There's nothing frivolous about defending the GPL, since it lies at the heart of how most free software is produced. > Sincerely, > Rjack -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany). _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
